This is one of the amazing essays that Dr. Kelley Ross has on his web site, and I think that I ought to highly recommend it even though I never got a chance to get through this theory as thoroughly as I would have liked. This approach of Dr. Ross has never taken hold is because it has a terrible pedigree. First, it starts with Jacob Fries who was an anti semitic. But he had one important insight that corrected a lot in Kant’s Philosophy. That is you need to start from somewhere. Logical forms alone cannot provide a starting basis for a a-prior knowledge. Then, it gets up to Leonard Nelson who improved this approach a lot Finally this gets up to Kelley Ross who has the insight that you have to add the insight of Karl Poper that any theory to be true, needs to be able to be refuted by evidence. That means, that even though knowledge start with immediate non-intuitive knowledge, it can be refuted by further investigation. Just like Newton’ Gravity and Maxwell’ Electrodynamics conflicted, until Einstein decided that Maxwell was right and Newton was an approximation. I am not anywhere near the great depth of thinking of any of these philosophers and yet I still have my own two cents to add here. I feel the conflict between Hegel and Fries is sad. Each one had some very great insights- and some shockingly stupid ideas—just like all of us. (I have been astoundingly and amazingly wrong and stupid. somehow, I imagine that is not an inaccurate description of a lot of us) Hegel thought the idiotic idea of Gothe about color d superior to obvious evidence of Newton’ theory. He was ignored by all empirical scient of his time for being really stubbornly wrong. Yet Frie had hi own hare of dumb idea. A pamphlet recommending the extermination of the Jews? I guess he would not have been a convivial dinner companion. On the other hand, Hegel realized that Kant was on to something when he came up with this triad scheme (that nowadays is thought of a thesis antithesis and aufhaben] (German nationalism Hegel thought was a dumb joke and even coined a phrase for it) but Fries was also right that reason ha to tart with some any kind of axion. You have to put your foot down somewhere in order to be proven right or wrong. But if you change, then you can never be proven wrong-even to yourself. You will just convince yourself, you never meant what you meant to say. It shock me until today that I have never hear of anyone who realized that Hegel simply using Plotinus’s: Good, Logos, Being in reverse order