A bit too much faith can come under the title ''non intuitive immediate knowledge,'' and I suspect that that was one of the reasons why Hegel was against this doctrine of Jacob Fries [as modified by Kelley Ross and Leonard Nelson].
But there is a way to justify this approach of Fries. Michael Huemer points out the flaw of many philosophical systems-- that is they start out with premises that are shaky at best. And in that way they differ from the exact sciences. While the exact sciences also start with premises, their premises are almost obvious from the start--though they can be modified or changed a evidence against them grows.
In this way faith and reason can work together-- reason can modify faith.
SEE THE web site of Kelley Ross ''friesian.com'' . Why Fries, Leonard Nelson and K. Ross are important is that problems in Kant resulted in many new approaches, many of which led to dead ends. The most fruitful that I can see is this Leonard Nelson's ''The New Friesian School".
A good place to see the problems of analytic philosophy is Robert Hanna [blog at against academic philosophy].
A good place to see problems in Hegel is Hobhouse [The Metaphysical State].
I could go on, but in the end my point will remain the same -that the best thing in philosophy today is Leonard Nelson and Kelley Ross's New Friesian School.
