I disagree with Kay on his assessment of OO, I disagree that he's even the inventor of it (though he coined the term, word out to the Scandinavians and even Sutherland).

I would claim that OOP is not about modularization at all; it is a way of thinking meant to help humans solve problems with a computer. It's a crutch, it is easy to apply, and has lots limitations. FP (thinking in terms of anonymous values vs. named objects) is an alternative, though more experienced programmers often use both ways of thinking where best appropriate (which is why you'll see OOP entity interfaces in languages like Clojure, and lots of immutable structs in C#). Neither can claim a decisive benefit in modularity or code reuse; you have to work extra hard for those.

We can definitely agree to disagree on this.