On my reading list currently is Samkhya Karika. This is a collection of aphorisms/sutras that expound the Samkhya philosophy.
I came across another interesting/somewhat humourous argument in the Karika directed against the Charvaka.
Amongst perception, inference and verbal testimony, the Charvakas accept only the former as the pramana [means of valid cognition]
If this is so, the Samkhya argues:
To whom does the Charvaka go around addressing and proclaiming that perception is the only pramana? Certainly, by perception alone, the ignorance, doubt and perversity of another person cannot be known. Thus, if, without knowing whether the person addressed is ignorant, or in doubt or perverse, the Charvaka were to go about addressing any and every person at random, certainly, such a person would be ignored as his expression is not fit to be heeded by all intelligent persons, as if he were mad. Only a mad man will go around repeating the same stuff to anyone and everyone over and over again.
The ignorance, etc. of another person has to be inferred only based on the words spoken and the actions of the person in question. Thus the Charvaka has to accept inference as a pramana if he is not to be deemed a mad man!