"Intelligent creature posses the ability to resist nature by nature's own design. So to accommodate this new issue, I am forced to devise a more complex continuum. We have to now imagine a multidimensional continuum. This becomes “realmism.” The same continuum we have been dealing with now extends into different realms (dimensions) in which the complexity grows greater with each new realm. The realm complexity grows greater because the consciousness accounted for in these realms grows more complex itself. Furthermore, these realms are in tandem with the continuum. There exists no division of the realms, they are indivisible just as the continuum is. The transition from one realm to the next is so gradual that there is really no knowable distinction. However the gradual transition does grow into more complex realms of existence. These realms account for the different levels of consciousness that emerge in the universe. It accounts for their capacity and how absolutes apply to these levels of consciousness. It accounts for the relative levels of subjectivity and objectivity found in these different levels of consciousness."

So there are levels of consciousness we must consider: objectivity and subjectivity. Objectivity and subjectivity also exist on the continuum. Although it is necessary to disassociate these terms from what we usually think of them. When we think of subjectivity, we usually think of a “mindstate” in which an individual lets subconscious factors affect his perception, such as prejudice or emotion. We usually think of objectivity as the opposite of this. But I am not using these terms in this way. When I mention subjective, I intend it to be a label of the “mindstate” when it is in the action of perceiving, (not how it manifests these perceptions). (By the way I put the word mindstate in quotations because I don't believe in minds, thus I don't believe in "mindstates." I only believe in brains and brainstates.)I am essentially using these terms as labels for levels of “mindsates” or consciousness. Furthermore, I think it is necessary to subdivide these concepts to allow more room for proposing newer, more extreme philosophy and to better create distinctions for levels of consciousness. I will again make-up words to conceptualize the ideas. I will also maintain a phonetic harmony with objectivity and subjectivity. So in a moment, I would like to propose a few new terms to better define our understanding of reality. But first I will present the example.

The Example
Our understanding of reality exists on the continuum and within realms of consciousness. To paint a picture, I ask you to imagine (but don't take literally, it is the essence of the ideas that matter) a man standing in a room. He stands before a mirror looking at himself. Another man stands in the doorway looking at this man. Aliens float above the earth viewing both of these men. A god looks in on the universe observing all of this. Now we could say that the man standing in the mirror is in a subjective position, because he is looking out and perceiving with his brain the outside world. But at the same time, aside from his subjectivity, there exists "reflectivity." The mirror is meant to symbolize the human ability to reflect on our self and be aware of our own awareness (consciousness). Reflectivity is basically the position in which the consciousness is objective to itself and its subjectivity. To better reveal this point, I ask you to imagine a dog standing before a mirror. What will the dog most likely do? It will bark because it will mistake its own reflection as another dog. It is unaware of itself. So now you can see why the "reflective" is important to conceptualize. SO, the man is standing before the mirror in a subjective position AND a reflective position. There are two levels of consciousness at work here. The subjectivity is at work, which the dog also shares. And the reflectivity is also at work, which the dog doesn't share, only the man does, because he has a higher level of consciousness with the ability to do so.

Men
Now, the man in the doorway observes the man in the mirror who is in both a subjective and reflective position. So does this make the doorway man objective? In a sense yes. According to realmism, yes. Within a certain realm of consciousness, yes, he is objective. But in other realms, no, he is not. He is objective within the human conscious-level realm, but not in any conscious-level realms that are higher. For this reason we give this doorway man a special distinction, he is in an interjective position. Because indeed he is objective to the mirror man, but he is still perceiving reality just as the mirror man or the dog does, so in the same sense he is still simultaneously subjective. So, at this level, humans can be subjective, reflective, interjective, and objective possibly all at the same time.

Aliens
So, what about the aliens? What role do they play? It is highly probable that they would possess a consciousness level that we could not imagine. So they will understand reality at a much higher level. So if they were observing this proposed situation, would they be considered objective? Yes they would be. However, they would still be perceiving by their brain (or whatever the sensory preceptor is), so they would still be in a level of subjectivity just as the doorway man is, just as the mirror man is, and just as the dog is, although it would be at a higher level, but the fact remains that the aliens are perceiving what they understand as reality through their brain (or whatever) and as long as it is through an imperfect brain, it is subjective to them. So they are also given a special distinction. They would be considered to be transjective, because they are of a higher consciousness level then the little humans in the room in the house on earth. For this reason they deserve this separate distinction. The man in the doorway is only interjective and not transjective because his consciousness level is pretty much equal to the man in the mirror, so their capacity to perceive is fundamentally the same. However the alien’s capacity to perceive would be beyond that of a human. So they are transjective, because they are perceiving across consciousnesses observing a lower consciousness. Similarly, a man observing a dog would be in a transjective position because the man is of a higher consciousness than the dog. (Keep in mind these distinctions are intended to simply allow us to understand levels of perceptions and consciousness; I am simply giving these levels labels.)

Gods
So, what about the god? (Again, not to be taken literally, the idea is what counts). Well if this god existed outside of the universe, or possessed a supreme consciousness, then his distinction would be labeled "ultrajective," for his position is unsurpassable, though it is infinite (which the continuum will allow). Now I would deny that a supreme being exists, but the idea is meant to put a final infinity on the continuum. (as a side note, if this being could somehow know other beings perceptions, then this would perhaps be deserving of a new distinction)

So, some points to reiterate. All of these different distinctions of consciousness exist on the continuum and within the gradual realms. But keep in mind that the continuum and the realms extend into infinity. Every level infinitely transitions into the next, so there is no possibility to pin point an absolute. So if we were to ask, "how subjective is the mirror man?" We would simply not know, all we know is that he is somewhere in the indivisible area of subjectivity on the continuum.

Levels of Reality
Now there are other terms I would like to introduce: the ultrareality. The ultrareality is perceived when a consciousness is no longer subjective. It would be a godlike being. Objectivity, and ultrajectivity exists within the ultrareality. Subjectivity, reflectivity, interjectivity, transjectivity, and objectivity can exist in what we (or others) understand as reality. So objectivity overlaps in the two realms of reality and ultrareailty.

To ellucidate this point, we have a cat. Its perception of reality is different than our own. In fact, our realities would be much different. In the cat's reality, there would only exist subjectivity (when it looks out and observes the world), interjectivity (when it observes other cats), and transjectivity (when it observes something lower, let’s say, bugs). A human possesess the reflective that the cat doesn’t. And the alien possesses no more distinctions than the human, but they just possess some of the distinctions (objectivity, subjectivity, reflectivity) at a higher level.

The Role of Realmism
Now I will admit that realmism can be considered a new addition to absurdism, but I do feel it has an honorable role. Many people will call an ultrareality absurd, I would agree. But can we really call it that? I conclude that it is probable that we can't imagine an ultrareality or an ultrajective “mindstate” because our subjective minds won't allow it. When we try to imagine it, we fall into the reflective because, in an attempt to imagine, we can call upon only what we know in our subjective level of consciouness. Similarly we have to look back at the cat or the dog. Can they imagine our higher level of consciousness? Of course not. We may be in the same position. There can easily be levels of consciousness much higher than our own, the likes of which we can never imagine. Thus, these consciousness levels would be further out in the realms beyond where ours is.

This is easily realized when we consider our origin and evolution. We depend on our five senses to perceive. Through these senses we know our reality. But what happens if we were to develop more senses? Would we know reality differently? Well that's a different issue. But it does emphasize how other consciousnesses can possess senses that we don't, empowering them to reach a higher level of consciousness.

So you may be sitting there like "so what?" Well it is difficult to understand the value of realmism beings it is so complex and on the verge of absurdism. But it does help when we try to understand the conscious position of other people or other creatures. It opens the door for us to estimate the capacity of other "minds." It also allows us to fathom further the existence of higher levels of consciousness. Also though, keep in mind that this is only "conscious realmism." Realmism applies to many different concepts that deserve complex analysis. I often apply realmism when trying to judge the true value of things or the value of some ideals. All I can say is that once you start imagining everything as existing on an infinite continuum and within indivisible realms then some things do begin to become a little more clear. It helps us to better escape our subjectivity, and progress further up the continuum towards an ultrajective position of perception.

Concerns to keep in mind:
Can we be objective to the universe with our subjective minds?
Can we truly be objective to other people, or are we trapped within our own subjectivity?
Could robots be more objective than we can when involving situations in which we think we are being completely objective? If they could be more objective, does this prove our "objectivity" as actually subjective?

My conclusion is that humans can very rarely (if at all) be truly objective. Subjective "minds" can very rarely realize true objectivity, because our perception is subjectively objective. Robots are in the same boat, because they can only be as objective as they are designed for. Nature has designed us, and it has not designed us to be objective. It makes sense that it hasn't. Rule one is for us to survive. Our subjectivity and disregard for others will help us survive. However, humans have developed a semi-objective position and this is one fundamental factor that has allowed us to surpass other species.

A summary of terms.

Subjectivity: we are looking out; outward perception, the beginning point for "reality" consciousness; it plays a role in most of perception
Reflectivity: we look in at ourselves looking out; inward perception, the objectivity to our subjectivity
Interjectivity:we look at other equals looking out; outward perception, the subjective objectivity of equal brains
Transjectivity: we look at unequals looking out; outward perception, the subjective objectivity of higher brains
Objectivity: looking out at equals or unequals looking out; outward perception, the ending point for "reality," a level of consciousness used in interjectivity and transjectivity
Ultrajectivity: looking out at ALL looking out; objectivity without subjectivity; true objectivity

Pseudoreality: perception of a false existence, i.e. an illusion (if Solipsism is true)
Reality: our perception of existence, usually subjective
Ultrareality: the supreme perception of existence