The author makes arguments for the functionality that OOP encompasses, but doesn't attempt to explain why these should be grouped under one abstraction. Instead

The author makes arguments for the functionality that OOP encompasses, but doesn't attempt to explain why these should be grouped under one abstraction. Instead the author assumes that this should be the case, and rather naturally ends up with the answer of objects. The author also has some curious opinions about FP approaches. For example, he points out that Haskell's type system distinguishes between homogenous and heterogeneous lists, but then considers this to be a disadvantage. I get the strong impression that the paper is arguing backward; assuming that the properties of common OOP languages are the ideal, and then deriving from that assumption the answer that OOP is the best paradigm.