What's overblown in my opinion is the treatment of "functional" or "object-oriented" programming as a feature of languages and not programs (though certain lang

What's overblown in my opinion is the treatment of "functional" or "object-oriented" programming as a feature of languages and not programs (though certain languages definitely make it easier). I've never found a better explanation of the real ontological differences between these paradigms than this section at the end of chapter 3 of SICP: https://sarabander.github.io/sicp/html/3_002e5.xhtml#g_t3_002e5_002e5 https://sarabander.github.io/sicp/html/3_002e5.xhtml#g_t3_00... > We can model the world as a collection of separate, time-bound, interacting objects with state, or we can model the world as a single, timeless, stateless unity. Each view has powerful advantages, but neither view alone is completely satisfactory. A grand unification has yet to emerge.