To me it seems the most important issue to straighten out is between Hegel and Leonard Nelson. That last is known as the Friesian school. It is completely ignored in the West, but was well known in the USSR.
The issues between these schools of thought are many about Kant's dinge an sich. Things in themselves isolated from all characteristics, [known by dialect, or by immediate non intuitive knowledge, or by straight reason according to the intuitionists like Huemer, G.E. Moore and Prichard.
It looks like the same sort of argument that existed between Plato and Aristotle until Plotinus made Neoplatonism philosophy based on Plato, but incorporated elements of Aristotle.
[The issues between these two schools seem great to them, but the areas of agreement are much more that the strange areas where philosophy drifted into afterwards. It seems that there is great value and insight in the Kant Friesian school but that should not be a reason to cancel Hegel or Prichard. What it looks like to me is is the "soul" The deeper level where intuitive [sense perception] and a priori knowledge originate. That is implied by Kelley Ross. I once wrote to him asking about this kind of question -that immediate non intuitive knowledge refers to a level of existence that is in the physical world and yet also refers to some level of reason--an end of the regress of reason. And his answer was that these two levels in their origin are one. That seems to refer to the soul. The "soul" seems to be one area that philosophy has skipped in some sense except the Friesian school.
But after one would come to this level, the questions still remain how to distinguish between area of good and evil- for every area of value seems to have an opposite area of value that mimics the authentic area of value.
