"Countless times", but you give one reference that has one paragraph that contains those bullets, with only a one-or-two-sentence justification for each (except the last, which is given no justification at all, just as an opinion). That's not much to back up your claims, even if it is Stepanov.
And even on "methodologically wrong", Stepanov's rationale is wrong. After programming in various languages for decades, to use his analogy, we had "proofs". Then the "axioms" of OOP were laid down.
Note also that Stepanov says that generic programming is for him the only possible way to program. I suspect (possibly wrongly?) that you adopt his criticism of OOP, but not the rest of his rather dogmatic statements.
1. OOP is technically unsound
2. OOP is philosophically unsound
3. OOP is methodologically wrong
4. OOP is a hoax
[1] http://www.stlport.org/resources/StepanovUSA.html