 To respect the requirement, we need to nest reference-level objects and properties in propositions, or proposition-like structures, also located at the level of reference. And then some of these structured reference-level entities—the true or obtaining ones—will, it seems, be facts, or at least fact-like. Furthermore, once one acknowledges the existence of facts, or fact-like entities, existing at the level of sense, it seems in any case impossible to prevent the automatic generation of facts, or fact-like entities, residing at the level of reference. For sense is mode of presentation of reference. So we need reference-level facts or fact-like entities to be what sense-level facts or fact-like entities present. One has to decide how to treat these variously housed fact-like entities theoretically. If one were to insist that the sense-level fact-like entities were the genuine and only facts, the corresponding reference-level entities would be no better than fact-like, and contrariwise. But, regardless whether the propositionally structured entities automatically generated in this way by sense-level propositionally structured entities are to be thought of as proper facts or merely as fact-like entities, it would seem perverse not to identify the world with these  entities.[11]  For to insist on continuing to identify the world with sense-level rather than reference-level propositionally structured entities would seem to fly in the face of a requirement to regard the world as maximally objective and maximally non-perspectival. McDowell himself hopes to avert any charge of embracing an unacceptable idealism consequent on his location of the world at the level of sense by relying on the point that senses present their references directly, not descriptively, so that reference is, as it were, contained in sense (1996: 179–80). To this it might be objected that the requirement of maximal objectivity forces an identification of the world with the contained, not the containing, entities in this scenario, which in turn seems to force the upshot—if the threat of Kantian transcendental idealism is really to be obviated—that the contained entities be propositionally structured as such, that is, as contained entities, and not simply in virtue of being contained in propositionally structured containing entities. (For a different objection to McDowell, see Sullivan 2005: 60 n. 6.)