I agree with the title, but not with the blog post. Strong typing is great. There is little reason not to use strongly typed systems. The post adds "static" ty

I agree with the title, but not with the blog post. Strong typing is great. There is little reason not to use strongly typed systems. The post adds "static" typing in too, modifying the argument. Dynamically typed languages allow you to easily have a very intimate understanding of your program; because you can write the program and modify it while it's running using a REPL. The post seems to conflate dynamically typed with untyped, which is very much not the same thing. The two are actually incompatible ideas. OP: I highly recommend you look into SICP if you want a concrete counter argument to static typing for large systems. A main focus of the course is controlling complexity through abstraction as systems grow to be large, and the course was taught using Scheme, which is a dynamically typed language.