Last week a lot of people made hay over a DevX article about OO programming. I saw it first via Phil Windley's blog. Generally speaking, most folks found serious problems with the arguments used in the article. Still, I think that fixation on a single paradigm of programming is problematic. As a language feature (vs a design methodology) most object-oriented features are syntactic sugar for one more more layers of function calls through a dispatch table. Over the years, I've heard many many arguments for why object-oriented programming (or pick your favorite programming paradigm) is the one true paradigm for programming. I haven't found any of those arguments to be universally applicable, and I'm growing more skeptical of those types of arguments as I read and write more programs.

Using the best tool for the job applies to programming paradigms too. Perhaps that's a part of why I've found myself drawn to languages like Lisp and Python. It is relatively straightforward to integrate new paradigms into these languages, and you aren't
forced to accept a single dominant paradigm. You can be single dispatch object-oriented when you need to, you can be multiple dispatch object-oriented when you need to, you can be functional if you need to, you can be logic/rule-based when you need to, and so on. I like it when I can use the right tool for the job at hand.