Various properties of objects. Lesson outline (mathematics) on the topic: Properties of objects

One of the most important conditions for the effectiveness of the educational process is the prevention and overcoming of the difficulties that primary schoolchildren experience in their studies.
Among secondary school students, there are a significant number of children who have insufficient mathematical preparation. Already by the time they enter school, students experience different level school maturity due to individual characteristics psychophysical development.

Math like academic subject, requires the child to have certain abilities: the ability to analyze and generalize material, the ability to think abstractly, in abstract categories.
It is precisely these abilities, necessary for the successful mastery of mathematical knowledge, that are insufficiently developed in some younger schoolchildren.

The heterogeneity of the composition of students in primary general education schools and different opportunities for mastering mathematical knowledge require a differentiated, individual approach to children when teaching them mathematics. It is necessary to search for effective didactic techniques to correct the difficulties that students experience, taking into account the characteristics of children’s development and their acquisition of mathematical knowledge.
These children experience significant difficulties in comparing two groups of objects. They can determine difference relations only in those cases when objects in groups are mutually - unambiguously (visually) correlated.
Reduced perception activity is expressed in the fact that children do not always recognize familiar geometric figures, if they are presented in an unusual angle, upside down.

Difficulties in learning mathematics cannot but be affected by such characteristics of these students as reduced cognitive activity, fluctuations in attention and performance, insufficient development of basic mental operations (analysis, synthesis, comparison, generalization, abstraction) and some underdevelopment of speech.
The content of the primary school program involves comparing objects and groups of objects based on students’ knowledge of color, shape and size, which they receive in the preschool period. However, students with mental retardation come to 1st grade either with insufficient knowledge about color, shape and size, or they do not have this knowledge. A contradiction arises between the requirement for students to know about color, shape and size and the insufficient development of this knowledge among students with mental retardation. The problem is how to fill in the missing knowledge about color, shape and size, taking into account the peculiarities of perception in students with mental retardation during lessons and remedial classes in mathematics.

General properties of objects and their manifestations

The concept of “General property of objects”

Properties expresses the characteristics of an object, which determines its difference or commonality with other objects and reveals its relationship to them. Each item has many properties. The properties of objects include: mass, time, color, smell, shape, length, area, speed, hardness, strength, temperature, etc.
If we consider sets of elements of different nature, then we can notice that the elements of each set have some common properties, if only because they are included in the same set: for example, a set of objects that have color, or a set of objects that have length. A common property is a property that is common to all objects of a given set. A specific or individual manifestation of a general property in each element of a set is called a value of this property. After all, each object of one or another set, for example, has its own color or length, i.e. color or length meaning.

If color values ​​carry a qualitative characteristic, generating an answer to the question “What color?” (green, red, blue, etc.), then the length value except qualitative characteristics(long - short) carry a quantitative characteristic, generating an answer to the question “How much?”, and they can be written in a certain way. Moreover, the answer to the question “How much?” makes you think: “as much”, “many” or “little”, but compared to what?
For example, the area occupied by planted potatoes on a summer cottage takes up “the same amount” (relative to the area of ​​beets) of space as the area of ​​planted beets, “a lot” (relative to the area of ​​radishes) compared to the area of ​​planted radishes, but “little” (relatively area summer cottage) compared to the area of ​​the entire dacha plot. Here we are talking about the external certainty of an object, which can be expressed in quantity if comparison criteria are found.
Lengths of objects can be compared by application, masses by weighing, capacity by capacity, time by the duration of an event, etc. It should be noted that only homogeneous properties of objects are compared, i.e. those that characterize one real state of an object: either linear extension, or inertia, or three-dimensional extension, or the duration of an event, etc.

If, for example, the length of the Christmas tree takes up “the same” space on a straight line as the length of the wave, “a lot” of space compared to the length of the arrow, but “little” space compared to the length of the stick, then the value of the length of the Christmas tree can be expressed by the number of waves and is written in a certain way – (I) waves; number of arrows and write down – (II) arrows; number of sticks and is written – (I) sticks. In this case, the wavelength, arrow length, stick length are called the units of Christmas tree length
The comparison, which “answers” ​​the question “Are the lengths of the herringbone and the wave equal?”, establishes the relation of equivalence (the herringbone is equal in length to the wave). The relation of equal size is reflexive, symmetrical, transitive, i.e. is an equivalence relation, and therefore generates a partition of a set of objects into equivalence classes of objects of equal length.

A comparison that “answers” ​​the questions: “How many times is the length of the Christmas tree greater than the length of the arrow?” and “How many times is the length of the Christmas tree less than the length of the stick?” sets the multiplicity ratio. Multiplicity relations are antisymmetric and transitive, i.e. is a relation of non-strict order.
If you ask the question: “How much is the length of the Christmas tree greater than the length of the arrow and less than the length of the stick?”, then the answer will also be expressed in quantity and written in a certain way: for arrows and for the Christmas tree. A comparison that “answers” ​​the question: “How much is the length of the Christmas tree greater than the length of the arrow and less than the length of the stick?” establishes a difference ratio. The difference relation does not obey the transitivity property, but it generates the “more” (or “less”) relation, which is a relation of strict linear order.

Thus, the length of the herringbone gives rise to answers to the questions: “What is the length of the herringbone compared to the lengths of the wave, the arrow, and the stick?” (equal, long or short), “How many waves, arrows and sticks fit along the length of the Christmas tree?” (wave, arrows and sticks) and is written in a certain way.
Properties of objects: mass, time, length, area, speed, temperature, etc. - are continuous if any adjacent parts of the object have the same value; their meanings generate answers to the questions “Which?” (equal or relatively opposite) and “how much?” (relatively specific); and they can be written in a certain way. Such properties are usually called quantities.
Thus, the general properties of an object express the characteristics of the object, which determines its difference or commonality with other objects.

Characteristics of the properties of objects: size, color, shape

Magnitude

The emergence and initial development of the concepts of quantity and its measurement were dictated by the tasks of natural science. In the process of life practice, the need arose to consider sets of objects characterized by a common continuous property quantitatively (division into component parts) so that in its manifestation this property is different for each element of the corresponding set. This property is called magnitude.

Historically, it is known that the concept of quantity arose as an abstraction of some properties of real objects and phenomena, the measurement of which led to the concept of number.

“Magnitude is everything that can be greater or less,” said the ancient Greek mathematicians.
“A set of quantities is something to which the concepts of more and less are attached, but not exactly measurable” - the opinion of academician A.N. Krylova (1863-1945).
“Magnitude is everything that is capable of increasing and decreasing,” is the definition of G. Darboux, corresponding member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences (1842-1917).

From the above, we can formulate signs for determining the size of an object.
Magnitude is a generalizing concept of continuous special properties of an object and is its abstraction. In other words, the value is abstract concept, expressing a qualitatively and quantitatively continuous property of an object. Quality is determined by equality (same) or relative opposite (big - small, heavy - light, high - low, thick - thin, long - short, etc.), quantity is determined relative to the chosen unit of value. Thus, abstraction from the properties of an object gives rise to the concept of quantity, the real essence of which is determined by the real properties of the object.

Therefore, the size of an object from the point of view of reality is understood as a property of the object, and from a formal point of view - a formal recording of the value (nominal number). With this approach to the concept of magnitude, one can find “points of contact” between all existing interpretations of the concept of magnitude.
Magnitude is a general continuous property of a collection of objects, the value of which is generated by answers to the questions “Which?” (equal or relatively opposite and “how much?” (relatively specific) and can be written in a certain way.
This definition of quantity is constructed constructively: through genus and species difference. The generic concept of quantity is “a general continuous property of a collection,” the specific difference is “the values ​​of which generate answers to the questions “Which?” (equal or relatively opposite) and “how much?” (relatively specific) and can be written in a certain way. The formulated definition can be used to recognize the size of an object.

Color

Color is also a general continuous property of a collection of objects, but its meanings generate an answer only to the question: “Which color of each of the collection of objects is red? blue? green? or other?" (relatively not the opposite). Therefore, Color is not a quantity;

Blue color (blue) is a general continuous property of a collection of objects, and its meanings give rise to the answer to the question: “Which blue color of each of the collection of objects is the same? Dark or light? (equal or relatively opposite). But to the question: “How many units are contained in the blue color of each of the set of objects?” no answer, because one of blue color not defined (not invented). Blue is not a quantity. Although, if you introduce a unit of blue color intensity and build a notation scale for each blue value (measurement scale), then the blue color will become a quantity.
The quantities of objects in the form of representations enter the life of a primary school student when performing exercises, measuring work and solving word problems. The received ideas about the sizes of objects are already in the basic and high school are replaced by strict definitions based on axioms. At the same time, the concept of quantity and its measurement may remain beyond the understanding of schoolchildren. Therefore, already in elementary school it is necessary to reveal the real and formal essence of the concept of quantity and highlight the main signs of its manifestation.

• The size of an object as an abstract concept expresses a continuous property of the object, since any adjacent parts of the object have the same size.
• The size of the object gives rise to the answer to the question “Which?” (equal or relatively opposite: big-small, heavy-light, high Low, thick-thin, long short, strong-weak, etc.) is a qualitative characteristic.
• The size of an object is determined by quantity (the characteristic of division into component parts) in a certain way.
• The size of an object has a unit of magnitude that can be divided.
• The size of an object gives rise to the answer to the question “How much?” relatively specific, and its value can be written in a certain way (formally) - a quantitative characteristic.
• The size of an object can be compared with a homogeneous size (comparability property). Comparison, which determines equal values ​​of a quantity, establishes a relation of equal size on a set of objects for a given quantity. A comparison that determines how many times one value of a quantity is greater or less than another establishes a multiple ratio. A comparison that determines how much one value of a quantity is greater or less than another establishes a difference relation. A comparison that determines whether one quantity is greater or less than another establishes a relationship of strict linear order.
• Magnitude, defining a relation of equal size on a set of objects, generates a partition of this set into equivalence classes of objects of equal size.

Form

By spatial representations we mean sensory-visual images associated with the shape, size and relative position of geometric figures in space (on a plane), which are reproduced in the mind without the direct impact of objects on the senses.
Children are not interested in a stationary object, but in its change, movement, inclusion in new connections and relationships, the possibility of “interacting with it” through various forms of visual interpretation and constructive-geometric activity. In addition, the world around the child is full of objects that have the geometric shape of a cube, parallelepiped, cone, cylinder, ball, but no segments, rays or straight lines.
From a philosophical point of view, any object of reality is the unity of content and form: “Content is the unity of all constituent elements object, its properties, internal processes, connections, contradictions, trends. Form is a way of existence and expression of content. Form and content in each specific object are inseparable from each other. Form is the unity of external and internal. It makes up the structure of the object. Big Soviet encyclopedia gives several meanings of the term “form”:

1. outline, appearance, contours of an object;
2. external expression of any content;
3. a device for giving something a certain shape;
4. uniform in color, cut according to other characteristics.

We will understand form as the main component of spatial representations as the outline, appearance, and contours of an object.
Thus, from the above we can conclude that quantity is a general continuous property of a collection of objects, the values ​​of which give rise to answers to the questions “Which?” (equal or relatively opposite) and “How much?” (relatively specific) and can be written in a certain way.
Color is a general continuous property of a collection of objects; its meaning gives rise to the answer to the question “Which color of each of the collection of objects is red? blue? green? Or other?" Color is not a quantity.
Form is a property of objects in the surrounding world, the unity of external and internal. It makes up the structure of the object.

Impaired perception of the properties of objects in younger schoolchildren with mental retardation

Even before school, children accumulate a large number of ideas about the shape and size of various objects. These views are necessary basis for the further formation of important geometric concepts, and then concepts. When constructing various buildings from “cubes”, students pay attention to the comparative sizes of objects (expressing this with the words “more”, “smaller”, “wider”, “narrower”, “shorter”, “higher”, “lower”, etc. .).

In gaming and practical activities familiarization also occurs with the shape of objects and their individual parts. For example, children immediately notice that a ball (sphere) has the property of rolling, but a box (parallelepiped) does not have this property. These physical properties students intuitively connect with the shape of bodies. But since the experience of students and the accumulation of terminology is random, an important task of teaching becomes the clarification of accumulated ideas and the assimilation of the corresponding terminology. To this end, it is necessary to systematically offer a variety of examples. Relationship between objects expressed in words“same”, “different”, “larger”, “smaller” and others are installed either on real objects (strips of paper, sticks, balls, etc.) or on their images (drawings, drawings). Each of the examples given for this purpose should clearly identify the main feature by which these relationships are clarified. For example, when figuring out which of two shelves is “larger,” it is important to ensure that both sticks are the same thickness (or the same length). In all cases, when making comparisons, it is necessary to select items for which the “sign of comparison” is clearly visible, unambiguous and can be easily identified by the student.

For example, it is easy to compare two balls of different diameters and colors, but it is difficult (especially at first) to compare balls of different diameters and the same color. In this case, students often say: “The balls are the same” (meaning color).
The result of students’ activities depends on the ability to determine the form. Therefore, the first exercises should be aimed at practical actions that require reliance on the shape of objects.
In the future, students determine the shape visually using the trying-on method.
Only on the basis of long-term use of sampling methods and trying on in the most different situations and on a variety of objects, students develop a full-fledged visual perception of form, the ability to isolate it from an object and correlate it with the form of other objects.

Students learn to distinguish size, as well as shape, practically. When working with objects, they pay attention to size and begin to understand that in many cases the result of actions depends on the correct determination of the size of an object, i.e. the quantity becomes a significant sign for students.
In the process of acting with objects, children gradually begin to distinguish the value visually.
Based on the long-term use of samples and trying on, children develop a full-fledged visual perception of size, the ability to isolate it, and correlate objects by size.
Thus, we see that the development paths for the perception of size and the perception of shape are the same. However, there are differences between them. Magnitude is a relative concept. The same object in comparison with others can be perceived as both large and small.

At the same time, the quantity has different parameters - height, length, width. Therefore, in addition to general definition“big-small” there are particular ones: “long-short”, “high-low”, wide-narrow.”
The perception of color differs from the perception of shape and size primarily in that this property cannot be isolated practically through trial and error. The color is a must see, i.e. When perceiving color, you can only use visual, perceptual orientation.
Initially, when determining the color, trying on and comparison by application play a big role. When two colors are closely adjacent to each other, students see their similarity or dissimilarity.
When students learn to identify colors when they are in direct contact, i.e. through overlay and application, one can move on to sample selection, to the real perception of color.

It is known that not all students with mental retardation can correctly assemble a regular children's pyramid. If they collect, they very often make mistakes in the process of selecting rings, and again and again return to the beginning of the work. This means that they do not notice “by eye” which ring is closer in size to the given one, do not know the technique of comparison by superimposition, do not know how to find the next ring, and often pick up the first one they come across. They do not have a stage of deliberation; they are unlikely to doubt the correctness of choosing the next ring. Comparing a series of objects by their sizes has corrective value and requires special training. Only as a result of specially organized clarification, the use of assessments in various situations under the guidance of a teacher, will students with developmental disabilities learn to notice and evaluate such features of objects as: volume, area, length, width, height.

It is difficult for a child with mental retardation to switch from a conclusion just made to a new one. The main difficulty is that directly opposite judgments are made about the same subject. When making comparisons, first-graders cannot yet be distracted from the size of the objects that make up the aggregate. They consider a larger group to be one in which the objects are larger or it occupies a larger area. Schoolchildren do not yet know how to place them in a way convenient for themselves, establish a certain order among them, or characterize the spatial relationship of these objects.
The perception of color differs from the perception of shape and size “in that this property cannot be isolated practically, through trial and error. When perceiving color, you can use visual perceptual orientation.
Based on this theory, we can identify the following disturbances in the perception of the properties of objects in students with mental retardation:

• they do not notice “by eye” which object is closer in size to the given one;
• do not know the method of comparison by superimposition;
• when making a pyramid, they don’t know how to find the next ring, they take the first one they come across;
• they lack the thinking stage;
• they find it difficult to switch from the conclusion they just made to another;
• cannot be distracted from the size of the objects that make up the aggregate;
• do not know how to place objects in a way that is convenient for them;
• do not know how to establish a certain order among them;
• don't know how to describe spatial relations these items.

These violations need to be corrected and corrected.

Appendix 1 “Collection of exercises aimed at developing ideas about the general properties of objects for students with mental retardation during mathematics lessons”

Distinguishing property and quality

The differences between the properties and qualities (of objects) are important for the correctness of our thinking and perception of the environment. Not much is known about these differences, although the concepts of “property” and “quality” themselves are used very widely, and more often in combination: “properties and qualities”. And they are often used one instead of the other, without delving into the essence of the differences between them. However, in the language itself one can find the answer to the question of how “quality” differs from “property”. After all, it is obvious that this is not the same thing: it is not for nothing that these two concepts coexist. If they were synonyms, then one of them would gradually be forced out of use. And the letter “and” in the expression “properties and qualities” is by no means an equal sign: it says that along with one thing there is also something else.

“Property” and “quality” are philosophical categories and at the same time everyday concepts. It is important for us to distinguish between them when we are dealing with specific objects and in specific life situations. The properties and qualities of specific objects are important to us, but the correspondence between the philosophical and everyday use of these (words) concepts is also important: after all, philosophy is called upon to reach out to real, everyday life, and not to withdraw into itself.

This is the definition of property given by the reference publication: “Property: a philosophical category that expresses that aspect of an object that determines its difference or commonality with other objects and is revealed in relation to them.” This is a quite good definition, and the “side” of an object is a “feature” of the object. But the concept of “feature” is more accurate, since the concept of “side” (of an object) assumes that we either walk around it, or mentally turn it before our eyes. The concept of “trait” expresses the fact that the object itself manifests its activity, regardless of which side we approach it from. Indeed, whether the “side” or “feature” of an object (in their totality) makes it possible for us to distinguish some objects from others, to identify their similarities and differences. But the expression “an object as a set of features” is still more successful than the expression “an object as a set of sides.”

And now the definition of quality (from the same dictionary). “Quality: a philosophical category that expresses the essential certainty of an object, due to which it is precisely this and not something else. Quality is an objective and universal characteristic of objects, revealed in the totality of their properties.” Analysis of this definition allows us to conclude that quality is secondary to property: after all, the essence of an object (and it is characterized by the difference between this object and other objects) is expressed precisely by the totality of its properties, which is stated in this definition.

However, it seems unjustified to reduce the content of one philosophical category – “quality” – to the content of another – “property”: That's why they are categories, to be independent, sovereign concepts. In this definition of quality, it is explained through a property. Of course, there is a connection between them, and we will reveal it further, but it is wrong to reduce one to the other. And one more thing: an object is “exactly this, and not something else” only due to a certain set of its properties (or its characteristic feature) - after all, it is this (see the first definition) that determines the “difference or commonality” of the object with other objects. Consequently, the definition of quality presented above is unjustifiably tautological to the definition of property.

“Property” as a reflection of the nature of an object

Use - a concept for distinguishing between properties and qualities

First, let’s make sure of the very fact of the differences between “property” and “quality”. To do this, consider the following fairly typical statement. “Thanks to aspirin’s ability to influence the thermoregulatory center, we can use it as an antipyretic.” What's important here? Firstly, it is impossible to interchange the words “property” and “quality”: it would result in nonsense, whereas if they were synonyms, it would not arise. Secondly, the concept of “quality” comes up as soon as we talk about the use of an object. Usage - key concept to distinguish between “properties” and “qualities”. Thirdly, when speaking about a property, we mean exactly that – a single property, a manifestation of the nature of an object, an element of its specificity. Speaking about quality, we mean the entire object - the bearer of a given quality - as a whole: the object - as the bearer of one or another property - precisely because of this, can act in one or another capacity.

If this object did not have a certain property, it would not be able to act in the capacity corresponding to it. Indeed, if aspirin did not have the ability to influence the thermoregulation center, we would not be able to use it as an antipyretic. The situation is similar with another property of aspirin. “Aspirin’s ability to influence blood clotting gives us the opportunity to use it as an anticoagulant.” Here, too, “property” and “quality” cannot be interchanged. But if aspirin did not have this particular property, we would not be able to use it in this particular capacity. Consequently, without an object having one or another property, we would not be able to use this object (as a whole - that is, in any capacity) in a certain direction.

Property and quality as a feature of an object

It's obvious that a property is a feature of an object as such, and quality is the same feature, but in comparison with something outside the object - the bearer of this property. As a bearer of properties, an object is perceived by us in itself, and its qualities are revealed in its relationships with something else outside the object. Here's a simple proof of this. There is a small planet in the solar system - Mercury. Its properties are well known to astronomers: mass, dimensions, trajectory, surface temperature. It is pointless to talk about any qualities of Mercury: after all, we consider it as such. What kind of quality is there!.. But here’s a simple consideration. Let's assume that we decide to calculate the trajectory of some other planet relative not to the Sun, but relative to Mercury. Who knows what we might need this for?! But having taken this planet as a starting point when comparing with other planets, we use it precisely as a basis for comparison: whether we compare trajectories, or masses, or sizes...

Quality is the result of projections of our needs

The concepts of “property” and “quality” are often used as synonyms. Sometimes this is not a mistake: after all, both are considered as a manifestation of the nature of the object, and both properties and qualities are its features. But “quality” is the result of the projection of our needs onto any feature of an object or onto the object as a whole. If the totality of the properties of an object is, as it were, closed (centered) on itself, then the totality of qualities, as it were, “pulls the object along many vectors - directions of its connection with other objects, including, and first of all, with us, the subjects of cognition and use in its needs of this object. As long as this or that property of an object remains unknown to us, we cannot use this object in one capacity or another, and the possibility of using an object in a given capacity completely depends on the presence of this feature, which in another relationship acts as a property.

Levels of object knowledge

Cognition of any object, process, phenomenon of the surrounding world has two levels. Firstly, we recognize them as such - exactly to the extent that their nature does not depend on our attitude towards them. We have to accept the nature of the object of perception (and, consequently, the totality of its properties) as such: after all, it is not in our power to change the order of things - only the Creator himself is capable of this. We just have to come to terms with the fact that the nature of this or that object is “such.” Of course, when knowing it, we can make mistakes, make false conclusions, but at the same time the dominant perception remains: “This does not depend on us! “Although we are fully capable of knowing this. Secondly, it is also possible for us to perceive an object as an object of our need. This is where we can fully express ourselves. Why? Because the needs of each of us, although they grow on the basis of four basic ones (food, sexual, security, information), but they are satisfied for each individual through interaction with various objects. That is why the same object is perceived (evaluated) by different individuals in different ways: it appears for them in different capacities. For some - as necessary and desirable, for others - as indifferent and unnecessary, for others - perhaps even as dangerous. To this the saying of Kozma Petrovich Prutkov: “For you, bitter horseradish is raspberries, but for me and blancmange, wormwood!” It is clear that the properties of “blancmange” remain the same, but this product acts in different capacities: for one – as a delicacy, for another – as something unpleasant.

In full accordance with the above, science is divided into fundamental and applied. The task of fundamental science is to identify as objectively as possible the properties of an object, including those deeply hidden from direct perception. The task applied science– find out what can be done with the property identified by fundamental science: in what capacity the object can be used. Consequently, a property is an objectively perceived feature of an object as such. Quality is a feature of an object, based on some of its properties, but becoming one of its qualities due to our attitude towards it.

"Pure knowledge" and "knowledge for us"

The properties of an object are features of its nature in themselves, while the qualities of an object are features of its nature in connection with us (and therefore in connection with our perception and our needs). This justifies the division of information into “pure knowledge” and “knowledge for us.” “Pure knowledge” has yet to be used - it is potential knowledge. “Knowledge for us” is always relevant because it relates to us while we are alive. Let's assume that life on Earth will someday cease for some reason and all living things will disappear. Then the planet - with all its physical and chemical properties - will remain the same, but none of these properties will be able to act in any capacity: not for anyone! Of course, there will be no one to further cognize it and discover its new properties. But as such it will retain its nature, the set of properties. Its qualities will “die” - along with humanity.

Reception with the concept of “red”

Let us now consider the content of the concepts “trait”, “property” and “quality” using the example of the word (concept) “red”. “Red color” is a trait of some objects. “Being red,” “giving the impression of being red,” is a property of objects that have this trait. “Red” as a danger signal is the quality of an object that has the trait “red” and the property of “being red” when used in practice. Of course, the object itself, the bearer of a given trait and property, always functions. In a certain connection, it acquires this quality: that is, for us. For example, the signal red on a river buoy: we use “red” (the color of the buoy itself and its light at night) to indicate safe and dangerous sections of the fairway. The feature of an object - “red color” has a signal meaning for us, and therefore objects of this color can be used in the corresponding capacity. We have already mentioned the red flag on the tower, the red lantern above the entrance to a certain establishment, the red buoy. In other situations, “red” (red color) is used for technical purposes: for example, when developing photographic film in the past, red light was used to illuminate the workplace, since it does not expose the film.

Thus:

• “Property” and “quality” of an object are not the same thing. A property is a feature of an object that reflects its nature as such, as different from other objects: precisely by the totality of the property. This or that feature of an object, which is its property when we cognize this object, becomes its quality when we begin to use it

“Quality” as a reflection of the significance of an object

Quality – the purpose of the object

The concept of “quality” has several vectors of meaning. Firstly, quality is the purpose of an item, the role of the object in which we use it. For example, a merchant does not have enough weights, and he uses some massive part of some old mechanism as a weight. He uses this part in this capacity only due to its property - massiveness. Previously, this part was used as an integral part of a certain mechanism, but now it is it has lost quality, and retains the property of being massive to the fullest extent. Hence, the same object, with the same properties, can be used by us in different capacities, but always specifically based on one or another property. For example, such a property (trait) as the shape, color, and metal composition of a given part is insignificant for a merchant, although these are its properties. Its quality, in this situation, is only one: the ability, associated with mass, to replace a weight. From this it is clear that the “quality” of an object depends on the nature of its use, but its “property” does not depend on this. Remaining itself, this or that property can become this or that quality, but in the presence of factors additional to the object: ourselves, our needs... For example, the same merchant, if he had a massive object of a different, more convenient shape, would use exactly him, but in the same capacity - weights.

Quality – level of production of an object

Another vector of the meaning of the concept “quality” is the level of manufacturing of the object, if we are talking about a man-made object. By making this or that object, we thereby give it certain properties, intending to use it in one way or another..

"Use" assumes that the object corresponds to its purpose– not only in function, but also in quality, strength, reliability, and aesthetic level.

Quality is the way an object is used

Behind the creation of a man-made object is always our intention to use it, and, therefore, by making such objects, we seem to anticipate certain qualities that are known and necessary to us in advance.” Using an object in one way or another is using it in one capacity or another..

For example, experienced craftsmen in the old days were able to build an entire temple with only one ax: thanks to the ability to use it both as a tool for measuring building parts, and as a tool for leveling their surface, and as a tool for adjusting ready-made building parts. In other words, taking into account all the properties of this known and simple object allows craftsmen to use it as at least three different tools: an axe, a plane, and a hammer.

Factors of converting an object's ability into quality

The ability of a certain object turns into the quality of this object due to two factors. First, as we have already said, is the specific role of the object (“used as a weight”). Secondly, this is the degree of correspondence of one or another property of an object to the nature of our need, the nature of our need. If an object fully complies with this and allows you to satisfy the need completely, we consider this object to be “high-quality”. A low-quality tool, for example, breaks in your hands and cannot be used for serious work. Consequently, the second hypostasis of quality is a measure of compliance with its nature of use (of the object). In this second understanding, “quality” correlates with the concept of a standard, a sample.

Quality standards

For properties (of an object), it is completely indifferent to what and how they could correspond, and therefore it is impossible to apply any requirement to properties: if the properties of an object do not correspond to your needs, leave it alone! But it happens that an object meets our needs, but its good quality, convenience (quality) do not fully meet our requirements, do not fully correspond to the standard - model, standard. If for properties there cannot be any “samples” in principle (after all, other properties are already another object), then for qualities the requirements are a guideline. Precisely in all those cases when we are talking about man-made objects.

Usage and Compliance

So, the concept of “use” entails the concept of “correspondence”: after all, the use of something is possible only due to its compliance with the task (goal) for which the object is used. The concepts of “sample”, “standard”, “perfection”, “standard”, “masterpiece”, “template” - all these are concepts related to “quality” and not to “property”. Properties seem to sleep (or live their own lives) until we decide to use the object, but when they “awaken” (or turn towards us), they turn into qualities.

Turning property into quality

Thus, “quality” is generated in a property by its connection with something, which in turn is connected with us, which is significant for us. The properties of objects discovered by fundamental science are potentially significant, and their significance is transformed from potential to actual by converting a previously discovered property of an object into a certain quality corresponding to it. This happens during its practical use and in accordance with the standard of satisfying any of our needs. Hence, the property of an object, coming into contact with something outside of this object and, thereby acquiring a certain significance, turns into the quality of this object. By exhibiting certain properties, an object is able to act (for us) in one or another capacity - as soon as the need arises.

Mutual wrapping of “quality” and “property”

So, the differences in the content of the concepts “property” and “quality” are quite obvious. But it must also be taken into account that in Everyday life, in language there can also be a mutual inversion of “quality” and “property”. An example of this is the statement “Let's talk about the consumer properties of quality and low-quality goods" Here there is a semantic “move” from “quality” to “property” and back, and this also has practical significance: it is this that determines the possibility of such a “move”, such a mutual circulation of these concepts. The very possibility of this is connected with the presence of two hypostases in the concept of “quality”: after all, “consumer properties” are actually precisely the qualities of an object, the quality of the object as a whole, as such. Its “quality” or “poor quality” is quality in its second sense, the sense of good quality, reliability, aesthetics, and compliance with (consumer) requirements. In this case, it is useful to distinguish between the quality of the plan (plan, intention, script, design, scheme) and the quality of execution (implementation) of this plan (in the manufacture of this item). Naturally, we are talking about man-made objects.

Subjectivity of the concept of “quality”

Let us continue our analysis of the dialectics of the concepts of “property” and “quality”. Here's the saying: " Characteristic properties this radio receiver – its high sound quality and reception stability.” The concept of “property” is used here to distinguish this device from others that do not have such properties. Its qualities are what these properties turn out to be for us when we begin to use it. If the sound quality of the receiver is indifferent to us, it will lose its relevance and significance, but its properties are fully preserved. And one more thing: for a demanding individual, such properties of a receiver do not yet indicate its high quality (specifically for him), while for a less demanding individual, this is a fairly high-quality, and perhaps even “high-quality” device. Hence, the concept of “quality” is more subjective than the concept of “property”, and it is also connected with the concept of “level of claims”.

Matching to individual needs

It is no coincidence that the quality problem is more difficult to resolve in industrial production than a problem of quantity: with all their properties, the industry can produce many receivers.

But the demand for them will be determined by how we evaluate their quality, their suitability. Anyone who is not indifferent to the level of the receiver will buy it, but someone who is not indifferent to the level of this item will look for a better one. This once again convinces us that properties become qualities precisely in relation to us and our needs, with our individual standard of the required result of a particular need. Individual, music lover, but with undeveloped hearing, will use a radio that an individual with a developed musical need will not want to use. The properties of the receiver will be the same (it is what it is, the way it was made - what properties were given to it), but the attitude towards it, and therefore the assessment of its quality - its ability to satisfy the need, may turn out to be very different.

Quality as the ability of an object to satisfy our need

The concepts of “quality” and “property” relate differently to the concept of “assessment”. A property is a non-evaluative definition - a fixation of the presence of a particular trait in an object; quality is an evaluative definition. Wherein quality can be defined as a generalized measure of an object’s ability to satisfy our need. If properties express the sovereignty of a thing (“I am who I am”), then its qualities are its conditional feature: recognition of quality depends on our attitude towards the object, and attitude is a connection accumulated by assessment (see our book “Society: the psychology of connections and relationships"). Whether we “relate” or don’t “relate” to the properties of objects, they will remain properties, and only a fool or a stubborn, unfriendly individual can not recognize the presence of an obvious property. Nobody can forbid us to arbitrarily change our assessment of the quality of an object: this is everyone’s right. “This” completely satisfies one, but does not satisfy another at all, given the same properties of the thing: we all have different hedonic standards (see our book “Introduction to General Psychology”).

Properties are inherent in an object, we endow it with quality

Properties are inherent in an object, but we endow it with quality—an assessment of qualities.. “The thing in itself” is the object as such, with all its properties that we recognize to a greater or lesser extent. to a lesser extent. As we learn about an object (deepening into its nature), we identify more and more properties in it, and their number depends on the content of the object. But the more properties of an object we cognize (discover, identify), the more opportunities we have to use it in the most diverse directions, the most different ways. Consequently, the more “vectors” of quality he will have. We have already said (using the example of an ax) how the same thing, with the same properties, can be used in different capacities. Let's say LSD: this substance has been known for a long time - lysergic acid diethylamide. But its hallucinogenic properties were discovered by accident, at the beginning of the last century, and only after that this substance began to be used as a narcotic drug (that is, the substance found its use in this – negative – capacity).

“Number of properties” and “number of qualities”

There is a certain relationship between the concepts of “number of properties” (of an object) and “number of qualities” (of an object). The deeper we study an object, the more properties we will identify (discover, discover). The process of cognition leads to an increase in the number of properties of objects that we discover. A after the property of an object is revealed (discovered, open), the object can be used either in one or in many qualities. Consequently, first we delve into a certain indefinite set (features of objects), and then in it we highlight a subset of what we have discovered - that is, certain of its features (properties). Then a certain single property allows us to use this object - the bearer of the property - also in a variety of ways: in a variety of ways of application, use, for a variety of purposes. Moreover in different situations, the same object, with the same set of properties, can act in different capacities, that is, have different significance.

Let's turn again to famous example: A traveler dying of thirst in the desert found a bag of gold. Naturally, he is disappointed, since this is about his life, and gold in these specific conditions is completely useless for preserving his life. At another time and in another place, the same gold could have yielded a lot of water, and not only that: the gold could have been used for ransom—and thereby—for preserving one’s life. Consequently, water, as an item of vital need, retains its quality (its value for the individual!) always (except for the situation when someone decided to drown it, for example, in a river). Gold, as a mediating object, can act in this capacity in commodity-money relations, or more directly - as a material for a tooth crown, which was done until recently.

The concepts of “role” and “purpose”

The contents of the concepts “role” and “purpose,” which are important in terms of our understanding of the essence of quality, coincide when we talk about objects, but may not coincide when we talk about individuals. For example, the following statement: “He was there as her acquaintance.” To be in this capacity is obviously a situational feature of a given individual, which “goes away” along with this situation. Similar One and the same object can have many situational qualities. The “purpose” of a given individual in a given situation depends on the purpose for which “she” took him with her to where he acted as her acquaintance. For the purpose of showing it to your friends? Boast about meeting him? Use his presence for something else? And all of these are different vectors of the meaning of the expression: “An individual in a given situation in a given capacity.”

Images of the expected

It is clear that images of what we expect are possible only on the basis of past experience, and the expectation (and anticipation) itself can be regarded as a special need state of the individual, his projection of himself into the future. But we always expect something passionately: in some capacity, which we assume in advance about the object of expectation, based on our knowledge of its properties. We have assessed this object in advance, having studied its properties, and now we expect (anticipate) a meeting with it - if it corresponds to any of our needs, if we need it. And we need him in a very specific capacity.

Conclusion

Property – a feature of an object that reflects its nature

• “Property” and “quality” of an object are not the same thing. A property is a feature of an object that reflects its nature as such, as different from other objects precisely by a set of properties. This or that feature of an object, which is its property when we cognize the object, becomes its quality when we begin to use it. Therefore, property is a factor in the sovereignty of an object, and quality is a factor in its suitability to meet our needs.
• One and the same feature of an object, which in relation to its other features acted as a property, in relation to us and our needs already acts as a quality (of this object). Much here depends on the situation in which we access the object.
• The common property of different objects gives them the ability to act in the same capacity: for example, meat and bread have the same property - they contain nutrients, and therefore they can be used in the same capacity - as food.
• When a certain property of an object, as a determined feature of its nature, turns out to be in connection with our needs and, therefore, acquires one or another significance, this is already a quality of this object. At the same time, behind the trait - the quality of the object - the same trait always seems to “shine through”, but as a property.
• If the main vector of the meaning of the concept “property” is the object as such, then the main vector of the meaning of the concept “quality” is ourselves, our needs. Therefore, it is always important to distinguish an object as such and an object in connection with something.
• There are a number of differences between properties and qualities (of objects). Property is independent, quality is relative. Property is non-situational, quality is situational. Therefore, the concept of “quality” is correlated with the concepts of “sample”, “value”, “masterpiece”, which is insignificant for “property”. When assessing the quality of an object, we trace the possible connections of this object, and when assessing the properties of an object, we focus on the object itself..

Quality – the degree to which an object’s parameters comply with our requirements

• Parameters are a quantitative characteristic of the properties of an object, which has a certain measure. The degree to which an object’s parameters comply with our requirements (as well as samples and standards) is already a measure of its quality. Not by chance There are (and are widely used) quality standards, but there are no property standards!
• You cannot criticize an object for having certain properties: they are an expression of its nature. AND if an object had different properties, then it would be a different object. But in what capacity to use this object with its given properties is our business. Each of us is capable of finding different things for the same object. application, that is, capable of using him in one capacity or another.
• The “quality” of an object is a high degree of its ability to act in one capacity or another: its full compliance with our standards and requirements; This is especially true for man-made objects. Quality is what we put into this object during its manufacture. It makes no sense to expect the property of a miraculous object to correspond to anything: the object is the way nature created it, but we are able to identify such a correspondence. When creating man-made objects, we specifically put into them properties that allow us to use them more successfully in the quality we need. A “poor-quality object” is one that was intended by us to be used in a certain capacity (role), but according to its parameters turned out to be inconsistent with our requirements.

Quality is a “consumer property” of an object

• Quality can be defined in the same way as a “consumer property” (of an object). “Consumer quality” is a tautology when it comes to the purpose of an object, but in another sense it is a characteristic of the degree to which it meets our requirements for its “quality.” Any property of an object, acquiring consumer relevance (significance!), begins to be perceived by us as one of the qualities of this object.
• Along with the concept of “use”, the key concept for the concept of “quality” is also the concept of “compliance”. Indeed, we always keep in our heads images (combinations of features) of objects that are capable of satisfying one or another of our needs. And when assessing each specific object, we always identify the degree of correspondence between the features of the assessed object and the sample object. Exactly the same evaluation operation, only with a different vector of meaning, is used by us when evaluating an object as “typical” or “atypical”. The fact is that the nature of an object can be expressed differently in specific instances of this object: in some it is clearly expressed, in others it is not. In terms of a need, its “typical” object best suits the completeness of its satisfaction, while a homogeneous, but “atypical” object may or may not be suitable for this.

1. Property // Soviet encyclopedic Dictionary. M., 1989. P. 1192.

And the Grelling-Nelson paradox.

According to another definition, property is the side of manifestation of quality. Moreover, not every property of an object (object) should be considered when determining quality: an object may have a property, but when comparing the object with others, it may not be distinctive or significant.

The properties of an object depend on the type of interaction between the object and the subject, for example: if you look at an apple, it has color and shape; if you bite it, it has hardness and taste; if you weigh it, it has weight; if you evaluate its dimensions, it has dimensions, if you touch it, it has roughness. An object appears its properties not only to the subject, but also to other objects, that is, properties can also appear during the interaction of objects with each other.

The set of some particular properties of an object can manifest themselves in some generalized property of the object (absorbed by a generalized property). For example, the “redness” of an apple is a generalized property of the apple, and the percentages of the content of individual chemical substances in the skin of an apple (characterizing this “redness” of the apple) - particular properties of the apple; The “dynamics” of a car is a generalized property of the car, and engine power, curb weight, final drive ratio, etc. (characterizing this “dynamics” of the car) are particular properties of the car.

A property differs from the logical concept of a class in that it is not associated with the concept of extensionality, but from philosophical concept class - in that the property is considered as distinct (separated) from the object that possesses it.

In logic

IN logic, based on Boolean algebra, the concept of “property” coincides with the concept of “statement”.

In mathematics

IN mathematics if any element of the set X is given, then certain property p is either true or false, that is, the concept of “property” coincides with the concept of “subset”. In formal language: property p: X → (true, false) (that is, a mapping, a function from X to a set of two elements). Every property naturally defines a subset (x: x has property p) and a corresponding indicator function. indicator function). In some branches of mathematics (for example, the theory of artificial intelligence), a more complex definition of a property is used as an equivalence relation on the set X. In this case, p: X → (the set of names of property values). The inverse images of all names in this mapping define the partition of the set X into disjoint subsets (property values). This definition of a property allows us to uniformly consider not only the qualitative, but also the quantitative characteristics of objects.

Application

Properties are used in science to form concepts. The properties of objects and situations are widely used in the theory of problem solving, in the processes of automation of production, management and information retrieval, in the construction of expert systems.

see also

Literature

• R. Benerjee “Theory of problem solving. An approach to creating artificial intelligence" - M.: Mir, 1972.
• This article was created using material from PlanetMath, which is licensed by the GFDL

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

See what “Property” is in other dictionaries:

- (Greek idion; lat. proprium) that which is inherent in k. l. an object and characterizes it in itself, and does not speak about its relationship with some other objects. In Aristotle's logic, S. that which is inherent in all members of a certain species and is specific to them; V… … Philosophical Encyclopedia

See quality... Synonym dictionary

property- and property. In meaning “quality, sign that constitutes a distinctive feature of someone or something” property, genus. properties; pl. properties (wrong properties), gen. properties. chemical properties of a substance. Have special properties. Meaning... ... Dictionary of difficulties of pronunciation and stress in modern Russian language

Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary

1. PROPERTY, properties, many. no, cf. A relationship of intimacy between persons that arises not through kinship, but from a marriage union (relationships of one spouse with the blood relatives of the other, as well as between relatives of the spouses). He and I are on property. 2.… … Ushakov's Explanatory Dictionary

A philosophical category that expresses the relationship of a given thing to other things with which it interacts. A property is often viewed as an external expression of quality... Big Encyclopedic Dictionary

Ozhegov's Explanatory Dictionary

PROPERTY, a, cf. Quality, a sign that constitutes a distinctive feature of someone or something. Chemical properties of the substance. Have special properties. This is a delicate matter (of a special kind, requiring a subtle approach). II. PROPERTY, ah, cf.... ... Ozhegov's Explanatory Dictionary

The relationship that arises as a result of marriage between one spouse and the relatives of the other or between the relatives of both spouses. In family law, the Russian Federation does not play a legal role, with the exception of S., which arises between a stepfather (stepmother) and a stepson... ... Legal Dictionary

I property cf. Distinctive feature, feature, characteristic feature anyone, anything. II properties about avg. Relations between a spouse and blood relatives of the other spouse, as well as between relatives of spouses arising from a marriage... Modern Dictionary Russian language Efremova

Books

• The essence of the category “property”, I. F. Lukyanov. The book examines the objective content of the category “property”, its role and significance as generic concept in the system of attributive categories, an attempt is made to logically...

Target: Strengthen the ability to identify and compare the properties of objects, find a common property of a group of objects.

To develop the ability to correlate flat geometric shapes with spatial bodies. Develop logical thinking. Continue to teach how to express your opinion and give examples. Cultivate motivation to learn

Organization of the lesson:

Part 1 – sitting on chairs

Part 2 – standing in a circle (physical education session)

Part 3 – sitting on chairs

Part 4 – standing in a semicircle

Part 5 – sitting on chairs

Materials for the lesson:

Demo– pictures with the image of a Pencil (the “Jolly Men” series), a landscape sheet of paper, pictures with the image of vegetables.

Dispensing– colored pencils (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, blue, violet), pieces of paper, sets of shapes: 5 circles – red, yellow, green, orange and blue, 5 ovals, 5 squares, 5 triangles and 5 rectangles the same flowers.

Progress of the lesson:

I Properties of objects - color. Colors of rainbow.

The teacher inserts colored pencils of all colors of the rainbow into the glass. The same cups with colored pencils are on the children's tables. The teacher shows a picture of a Pencil:

Educator:- Guys, our Cheerful Pencil told me amazing story! It turns out that pencils can talk and even brag. This pencil said (picks up a red pencil): “I can be a poppy, a fire, a flag!”

The teacher draws a red line on album sheet paper pinned to the board, and the children draw a red line on their pieces of paper. Then the teacher asks them to tell what the other pencils boasted about.

Educator:- Guess what these pencils said?

Children by at will go to the board, choose a pencil and leave it on a sheet of paper attached to the board. The rest of the children draw lines with the same colors on their sheets of paper. Sample answers from children:

Children:- Orange: “I’m an orange, a carrot!”

Children:- Yellow: “I am chicken, sun, turnip!”

Children:- Green: “I am grass, foliage, the whole forest!”

Children:- Blue: “I am forget-me-not, sky, ice!”

Children:- Blue: “I am ink, sea, cornflower!”

Children:- Purple: “I am plum, lilac, twilight, bell!”

The teacher thanks the children for their help and asks a riddle.

Educator:- Cheerful Pencil whispered one word to me. Guess which one.

Through the fields, through the meadows

An elegant arc emerged.

Children: Rainbow

Educator:- Who knows the colors of the rainbow?

Children name: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet. You can invite them to make a rainbow from strips of colored paper.

IIPhysical education lesson “Guess whose voice?”

Children stand in a circle, in the center of which stands a blindfolded driver, hold hands and, walking in a circle, say in unison:

We all stood together in a circle,

They turned around suddenly

(everyone turns 180 degrees and goes in the opposite direction)

How about we say: “Skok, skok, skok!” -

One of the children, at the direction of the teacher, repeats the last line, and the driver guesses who it is. If he didn’t guess correctly, then he continues to be the leader, and if he guessed right, then the one who gave his voice becomes the driver. The game is repeated 2 – 3 times.

It is better to entrust the role of the presenter in the 2nd and 3rd rounds of the game to one of the children.

IIIComparing objects based on similarities and differences (color, shape, size, material, purpose, etc.).

1)Teacher:- Look at the pictures. What is shown in the first picture?

Children:- Doll and bears.

Educator:- Compare a doll and a bear: what do they have in common and how do they differ?

The teacher, if necessary, can start a comparison: the doll and the bear have a common purpose - they are toys; same size; What they have in common is that both the doll and the bear have ribbons, but they differ in that... And the children name the signs of difference on their own.

Educator:-Compare balloon, on which Dunno is flying, and the ball: what do they have in common and how do they differ?

Children:-They have the same shape: both the ball and the balloon are spherical in shape. And they differ in color: the ball is yellow and blue, and the balloon is yellow and red. They also differ in size: the ball is small, and the balloon is large. Their purpose is also different: a ball is a toy, and a balloon is a flying machine.

Educator:- Compare the hedgehog and the Christmas tree.

Children:“The spruce tree looks like a hedgehog: the hedgehog is covered in needles, the fir tree is the same, and they “live” in the forest.” They differ in size: a small hedgehog, a Christmas tree more hedgehog. They also different color: the hedgehog is gray and the tree is green. A hedgehog is an animal, a Christmas tree is a plant.

In more prepared groups, work can be organized as follows: each child chooses one of the pictures and talks about it, and the rest of the children complement.

2) Educator:- Look at the picture. Why do you think the fox and carrot are connected by a string?

Children:- They are both orange color.

Educator:- Well done! Now take your “magic” pencils and connect objects of the same color with “magic strings”.

Children draw lines independently for 1–2 minutes. Then they discuss out loud who completed the task and how.

Educator:- Tell me, what pictures did you connect? Why?

Sample answers from children:

Children:- Carrots and foxes are orange.

Children:- I combined the chicken and the moon because they are yellow.

Children:- Tomato and ladybug red.

Children:- The frog and the apple are green.

The teacher helps the children correct their mistakes. In conclusion, it is important to praise those who tried: “Aizat did a great job - he drew all the lines correctly! Leah is also great – she found and corrected her mistake!”

3) Children complete the task independently.

Educator:- And now you have to find signs of difference and correct the mistakes of the artist Dunno.

Independent work can be done in the form of a competition game: who can find more and faster? distinctive features. The winners receive prizes.

IV. Physical education lesson “Look both ways!”

Children line up in a row ( no more than 7 – 10 people). The driver is chosen using a counting rhyme or by appointment. He is asked to remember in what order the children are standing. After the driver turns away, the children change lanes. The driver must determine what has changed and restore the disturbed order. The arrangement can be linear, circular, chaotic - depending on the level of complexity that the teacher wants to offer.

V. Consolidation of the ability to highlight the properties of objects.

1)Conversation about vegetables. Guessing riddles.

Educator:- What vegetables do you know?

Educator:- What grows in your garden ( for example, at the dacha)?

Educator:- What vegetables are they talking about? How did you guess?

a) The red nose has grown into the ground,

And the green tail is on the outside.

We don't need a green tail

All you need is a red nose.

Children: Carrot

b) In the summer in the garden -

Fresh, green,

And in winter in a barrel -

Yellow, salty.

Children: cucumbers

c) Round side, yellow side,

A bun is sitting on a garden bed.

He was rooted firmly into the ground.

What is this?

Children: turnip

d) It’s big, like a soccer ball,

If it’s ripe, everyone is happy.

It tastes so good!

What kind of ball is this?

Children: Watermelon

Children explain by what signs they guessed what we're talking about: by color, shape, size, taste, etc. Guessing pictures depicting vegetables are displayed on the flannelgraph. You can create “confusion”: display pictures with errors, and then sort them out.

2) Game “What does it look like?”

On the flannelgraph there are pictures of vegetables.

Educator:- Well done! You are very good at solving riddles. Now look carefully at the pictures and choose geometric shapes that resemble these vegetables.

Sample answers from children:

Children:- The carrots are orange, shaped like a triangle, - I'll put orange (red) triangle.

Children:- Turnips are yellow and round. I choose the yellow circle. Etc.

Educator:- What did you like? What did you find difficult?

Educator:- Look: on the page below Dunno began to draw a pattern. Try finishing it at home.

The academic grammar of the Russian language lists the following types of objects, as they are understood in grammar: objects, phenomena and events of reality, and especially highlighted... living beings. This listing is incomplete because it does not cover ideal things. For example, a syllogism is not an object, phenomenon or event of reality. He is also not a living being. And yet it is a real subject in the grammatical sense. It is expressed in language by a word denoting objects - a noun.
32
The essence of grammatical understanding of the subject is well expressed in school textbook: “The subject in grammar is everything about which you can ask who is this? or what is it?” .
Who is this? or what is it? you can ask about everything that our thought is directed at, regardless of whether it is an object of the material world or its reflection in a person’s head. Thus, the grammatical category of the subject corresponds to the logical and thereby qualitative understanding of the thing.
Of course, spatial characteristics are the most obvious; they are most likely to “catch the eye.” Therefore, the original meanings of the words “thing” and “object” are indeed primarily spatial, just like the meanings of many other words. However, this is not an argument in favor of understanding these words in this way at the present time.
The history of language shows how, from initially purely spatial ones, many other, less visual meanings develop, which subsequently become increasingly used. Therefore, Tugarinov’s above references to the etymology of the word “object” are unfounded. Philosophical analysis must operate, first of all, not with those meanings of words that were basic in the past, but with those that become more and more common in the process of language development.
Many facts indicate that in language the qualitative understanding of a thing is increasingly replacing the purely spatial. Qualitative understanding of a thing is manifested in language not only in the absence of grammatical differentiation of material and ideal objects, but also in a number of other phenomena. For example, we say about an adult that this is the same person who was once a child. Understanding a thing spatially, we would have to say about an adult that it is the same child. However, we say that it is the same Human. And this is true with a qualitative understanding of things. One thing -g- child has turned into another thing - an adult, but this transformation takes place within the qualitative boundaries of the thing that we call a person.
To summarize, we can say that the qualitative understanding of a thing is unified in ontological, logical, and grammatical terms.
3 A. I. Uemov
33
Chapter II
PROPERTIES
1. PROPERTIES AND QUALITY
In the previous paragraphs, the concept of quality, on the basis of which the concept of a thing was formed, was not defined. The use of the word “quality” in the above discussions may cause a reproach for confusing the concepts of quality and property, especially since sometimes one of these words was replaced by another for purely stylistic reasons. Usually in our philosophical literature the concepts of quality and property are considered incompatible with each other. To clarify these concepts, which are important for our work, let us first consider their usual understanding. Let's start with the concept of “quality”.
At one time, Hegel defined quality as “determination identical with being.” The Hegelian understanding of quality in the 20s was the basis for the definition of this concept in many works on dialectical materialism. In a special monograph devoted to the problem of quality, A. Stolyarov, based directly on Hegel’s understanding, gives the following definition: “This is constancy or stability in variability is what makes a certain being possible, the certainty of which, making it what it is, is its quality.”
Many years later, Hegel's formulation was reproduced by B. M. Kedrov. This understanding of quality found a more complete, expanded expression in textbook edited by G. F. Aleksandrov. “Quality is the inherent certainty of objects and phenomena, the organic unity of properties, signs, features that distinguish a given object
34
or an appearance from others. Quality as a philosophical category serves to designate the specificity of things, phenomena of the world around us.
Quality is what makes objects or phenomena what they are, data, and not others.”
In essence, the concept of quality is formulated in the same way, although sometimes not so clearly, in other educational publications on dialectical materialism. The only thing that stands apart is the textbook by M. N. Rutkevich, in which the concept of quality is not defined, but speaks of qualitative differences as differences in essence.
What is a property? What is the difference between property and quality?
Here is what B. M. Kedrov writes about this: “Quality and property are not the same thing. Quality is inalienable from a thing: its change means a change in the thing itself: a property, on the contrary, is associated with the relationship of a thing to other things and processes of nature. This means it is relative. Under changed conditions, a thing may lose its property, but in such a way that it itself remains the same qualitatively defined thing.”
The same thing is essentially said in the textbooks of dialectical materialism, for example: “Quality reveals itself through properties in the process of interconnection of objects and phenomena, and the organic unity of properties forms the given qualitative certainty of an object or phenomenon. However, quality and properties are not equal. Quality is a holistic characteristic of a thing or phenomenon, while a property reveals a thing or phenomenon from some side.”
So, the difference between quality and property is seen in the following: a) property is relative, quality is absolute; b) without certain properties a thing can exist; the destruction of quality destroys the thing.
Of course, it is possible to formulate the most various concepts. The discrepancy between the concepts of different people cannot in itself serve as a basis for accusing one of them that his concepts are incorrect. Therefore, other things being equal, in order to avoid empty disputes over words, it is necessary to proceed from generally accepted concepts and definitions.
3*
35
However, a revision of concepts and definitions is justified if the old concepts lead to a contradiction with experimental facts or with other concepts and judgments, the truth of which is beyond doubt. Both were discovered in relation to the traditional understanding of things. What can be said in this sense regarding the above definitions of quality and property?
First of all, it should be noted that these definitions are incompatible with the traditional, spatial1* understanding of a thing. According to these definitions, different things must have different qualities, and identical things must have the same quality, since qualitative specificity distinguishes a given object from all others.
But the identity of things, understood as bodies, is determined exclusively by spatio-temporal relations, while for determining the identity of qualities, spatio-temporal relations are not so significant. Two electrons located in different places in space are two different things, therefore, we would have to consider that their qualities are different. But, on the other hand, they have the same “organic unity of properties, characteristics, features” that determines the quality, therefore, they have the same quality - to be an electron.
Such a contradiction, of course, does not refute the definition of quality - it can only serve as an additional argument against the traditional understanding of a thing. In addition, this contradiction indicates that the definition of quality must be consistent with the qualitative understanding of the thing. But there is no such correspondence either. Indeed, quality inherent things it should characterize thing. But that, What inherent, then What characterizes, must be somehow different from what why inherent What characterized. In other words, the concept of quality must be different from the concept of a thing. But the above definitions of quality make them identical. In fact, what can a thing have other than the organic unity of properties, signs, etc., that distinguish it from other things? The above-cited book by A. Stolyarov directly speaks of the coincidence of the categories of thing and quality: “In Marxist literature
36
item and quality are often equated.”
In addition, the considered definitions of quality contradict many indisputably true provisions about properties and qualities, including those given by the authors of the definitions of properties and qualities.
Thus, B. M. Kedrov, in full agreement with the facts, asserts that the property is relative, that is, it depends on the connections of a given object with other objects and changes with changes in the latter. Moreover, this characteristic of a property is opposed to the definition of quality. At the same time, quality is a set of properties. Could it then be irrelevant? Apparently not. Therefore, it is impossible to contrast property and quality in this regard.
Further, B. M. Kedrov considers the following words of V. I. Lenin to be very important for understanding quality: “Quality and sensation (EtrKpishshch) are one and the same, says Feuerbach. The very first and most original is sensation, and in him inevitable and quality..." .
But sensation in itself does not give us the opportunity to perceive the holistic certainty of a thing. With the help of sensations we perceive only certain aspects of a thing. On their basis perception arises. And in order to know even in general outline such internal certainty of a thing that distinguishes it from all other things requires quite complex work abstract thinking. As the history of science shows, from knowledge of individual aspects of a subject to knowledge of what B. M. Kedrov calls quality, “usually a lot of time passed.” B. M. Kedrov himself shows this with instructive examples from the history of chemistry.