I've been pondering about the distinction between the object/concrete/particular vs property/abstract/universal.... (side note: I used to think that properties are more "general" than objects, but then I realized that is not true, since an object can have a "bundle" of different properties, as much as a property can be "spread across" multiple objects.) And the object and property view seemed to satisfactorily describe the world, but then I'm not sure how to fit concepts of "structure," "interactions," and "change," etc. into this view. These concepts seem related to complexity and emergence. Are these also types of properties?
In computer science there is a concept of object-oriented data (wholly unrelated to object-oriented ontology). In the object model, every object has two kinds of characteristics, viz. properties and methods.
Properties are passive aspects, while methods implement dynamic changes and can interact with other objects.
Object classes may be defined, specifying the properties and methods which all objects within the class must possess. Any such object is an instance of its class.
It is quite a useful and widespread way of looking at things, but it does not suit all situations. Other paradigms such as structured, procedural or functional approaches are better for some kinds of complexity.