The problem mostly caused by people insists use OO in position where is looks not natural nor make sense. Another poster mentioned that any paradigm can be mis

The problem mostly caused by people insists use OO in position where is looks not natural nor make sense. Another poster mentioned that any paradigm can be misused. Yes but OO has a sort-of "least bad to miss-use" quality. You can have a date object or a query object or Haskell-function object, and they are all conceptually terrible but they still allow people who only know OO to work with all kinds of things. OO is created to "glue" anything together with anything else. The equivalent with functional programming is "FP is created to "glue" only other functional elements together with other functional elements". And OO definitely offends the sensibility of those who things done correctly and well - which includes lots of programmers. The "least bad" is indeed an enemy of the good. But you're not going to get all the world's systems redone correctly as the new paradigm so if you want to end OO, you'd need an alternative that could also least bad in many circumstances.