"Thing in itself" is not open to reason to Kant. [God, the soul, space, time] That provides and answer for faith. However then to what does reason work for? Things in the area of conditions of possible experience. [That will include the synthetic a priori.]
With Fries and Leonard Nelson however there is knowledge by means of faith not senses nor reason. [That would have started from Jacobi's critique on Kant.] Hegel would not agree, but rather we can know about God by His own revelation, not by our reason.
But to me it seems back to Kant and Hegel is the way to nowadays and forget about obsolete twentieth century philosophy. [See Robert Hanna about "Analytic philosophy". Searle noted how most of twentieth century philosophy is "obviously false". Kelley Ross clearly simply holds to get to Kant with Fries. But in spite of the value of his amazing approach, still I think that doe snot cancel the value of Hegel.]
With Fries and Leonard Nelson however there is knowledge by means of faith not senses nor reason. [That would have started from Jacobi's critique on Kant.] Hegel would not agree, but rather we can know about God by His own revelation, not by our reason.
But to me it seems back to Kant and Hegel is the way to nowadays and forget about obsolete twentieth century philosophy. [See Robert Hanna about "Analytic philosophy". Searle noted how most of twentieth century philosophy is "obviously false". Kelley Ross clearly simply holds to get to Kant with Fries. But in spite of the value of his amazing approach, still I think that doe snot cancel the value of Hegel.]
