Robert Hanna is right about "Forward to Kant". I mean to say that Analytic School [starting from Frege] while thinking to improve on Kant, really missed the boat. They detracted, not improved. [Of course, it was not just Robert Hanna that noticed this. It started with a fellow by the name of Katz that I think was the first to see the gigantic holes in the Analytic School.]
But let's just say we would all go back to Kant. Would that not leave the same problems that existed in the first place that the people after Kant tried to deal with? My feeling about this is one important school is that of Kelley Ross [The Friesian School] who bases his approach on Fries and Leonard Nelson but is an advance on both. [His advance is think is largely based on Gretta Hermann.]
But on the side of this there is Michael Huemer [based on the Intuitionists--Prichard, Ross]. While based on the Analytic tradition , still it seems impossible to ignore Huemer.
And further the is still the elephant in the room which is impossible to ignore--Hegel. Though sadlly he does not seem to have any spokesman outside of the turn of the last century McTaggart and Cunningham.
[The Communists certainly love to take stuff and ideas from him to build up their totalitarian societies. But there does not seem to be any real engagement with Hegel per se. [I mean just try to listen to social studies professors that try to defend communisms as the peak of freedom and prosperity. I guess that is easy to do nowadays when the street long lines to buy a loaf of bread in the USSR are all forgotten.And the idea that the USSR stood for freedom beyond absurd.\
