ABSTRACT
It seems almost too obvious for argument that this is not his view. None of the problem-solving powers he ascribes to the thesis that bodies are not things in themselves would even seem to belong to that thesis on this interpretation. Moreover, the thesis would generate problems of its own. For example, we should have to answer the question whether our perceptions of bodies in space were the direct outcome of our being affected by things in themselves or were the outcome of our being affected, in our empirical constitution, by bodies in space. The former answer would require a thesis of pre-established harmony such as Kant explicitly rejects; the latter would require us to have knowledge of the real causes of our perceptions, a thesis which he also explicitly rejects.
