``Computer science''

Why do they call it computer science?
It's not about computers and it's not a science.

A lot of programmers and computer scientists tend to confuse what with the how. It's an easy trap to fall into if you're only exposed to verbose imperative languages (no, it's not a Java bean you're sending over the connection, I have no beans in my code) because it's hard to see the forest for all the trees.

Object orienteers' are among the worst. If you want to treat everything as an object, fine. It doesn't make it so. That's just one way to look at it.

But people knee deep in declarative and purely functional languages make similar mistakes. No, not everything is really a monad. No, types aren't really algebraic. They are useful ways to look at things, sure, but there are other formalisms and ad-hoccery that are just as valid and useful in other contexts. An isomorphism is not equality.