Lines of Definition

It is interesting how we describe things. I don't know if people have always done it this way or just since science has become so important over past few hundred years. Typically the universe is divided into two categories which are "subjects" and "objects". ( I am now borrowing from a favorite author of mine). There are possibly to broader categories or perhaps just more appropriate categories though, that the "static" and "dynamic", an idea which is partially the inspiration for this blog. Typcally when we try to define something, we give it definition based solely upon its static attributes. Because these are the attributes which can be recognized empirically gives reason for my belief that this trend is related to the rise of science. What if it is more accurate though to describe something by its dynamic qualities? I am think of the manner in which a given thing functions and relates to things in the universe. If this were this instance, the "thing we are discussing" would actually have to be understood only terms of its functions and relations. Kinda wild, huh? Most people probably would prefer not to invest the effort towards restructuring their ontology around relations rather than objects, but I think it may actually be the most accurate way of indicating what makes anything distinct from anything else, which seems to be what defining is all about. I'll see if I can come up with a good example and hopefully that will illustrate (have to be careful now about saying define) what I am getting at.