Disagree entirely. OOP is 'widespread' because it is frankly a very powerful (and obvious) way to encapsulate and organize information and function by breaking

Disagree entirely. OOP is 'widespread' because it is frankly a very powerful (and obvious) way to encapsulate and organize information and function by breaking down said problems into digestible units or 'mini modules' if you will, that also happens to lend well to how humans interpret the world. Polymorphism is a very powerful tool for adaption. Far from 'problems at scale' - it's the complete opposite: well designed OOP is generally the best abstraction to use at scale, to the point wherein most of the world's most comprehensive APIs are in fact OOP. Inheritance is definitely overused, and OOP is not ideal for many kinds of projects, but overall, it's successful because it's extremely useful. It's 'mid level' Engineers, those who have discovered the foibles of OOP Orthodoxy, who 'develop their own ideas for the first time' who are the most ardent critics. Those who get past that see it for what it is, just a tool, very useful in many ways, not so much in others. TypeScript has fundamentally better OO utility that Javascript, Dart was developed using OOP, Kotlin absolutely kept those ideas, etc. etc.. Obviously, maybe not the best for a lot of systems programming. It's 100% here to stay, or at least an evolution of it.