Dr Kelley Ross mentions in his PhD thesis [see https://www.friesian.com/]that there is a sort of ambiguity what is it that the categories are meant to unite, just conceptions or also perceptions.["A fundamental ambiguity in Kant concerns just what it is that synthesis generates, a structured set of concepts describing the world or our immediate perceptions."] If it would be just conceptions then everything would be OK. But how can they unite perceptions? Well Kant notices this problem himself and claims that because of this problem it must be that perceptions themselves are themselves rational. Structured by reason. [That surely sounds like the exact point of Hegel.] But Dr. Ross takes a different approach and claims that because of this very sort of problem--that sensations and conceptions are so different there must be a deeper source of knowledge that both are just two sides of the same coin. [You can also see this as almost implicit in Kant himself if you think of the categories are being like the computer chips that process the incoming information and signals. Then the natural question to ask is, "Who is the user?" The answer: the soul.]
The Kant Fries school however holds like Schopenhauer that reality itself is irrational. --or beyond reason.
Kelly Ross has a sort of chart. He shows things of value go up from all form with no content ;ike Logic which is formal in that its forms do not have any content. If A implies B and B implies C then A implies C. A, B and C have no content. Then he goes up to an area which can not be reduced to pure logic like Mathematics as we know from Godel. So math has more content but less form. numbers have reality. This is the old argument if universals exist. Well it seems that trees exist. Not the concept of trees but actual trees. Michael Huemer brings some proofs of this. One that I recall off hand is that yellow is a color. Many things have it. So universals exist.
Music and art have more of what is called numinous content. Some sort of value that can not be reduced to a computer program--as we know from the many that have tried to do this with Bach.
Values that involve holiness even more so have less form than that, and even more content. If you continue the progression you would get to God who has no form.
[I should add that the Kant _Fries school is not "psychologism" as Kelley Ross takes some time and effort to point out.]
