shitface's Journal: static typing bad for OO languages

I am becoming more and more convinced that static typing just does not belong with object oriented programming. Explicit downcasting is a pain in the ass (and most people confuse downcasting with upcasting). Besides the woes of casting, there is the fact that the compiler does a static guess as to what function to call. Guess what the output for the following Java code is:

public class example{
    static class class1{
    String name="class1";
    }
 
    static class class2 extends class1{
    class2(){name="class2";}
    }
 
    static void fn(class1 c)
    {
    System.out.println("class1");
    }
 
    static void fn(class2 c)
    {
    System.out.println("class2");
    }
 
    static void fn2(class1 c)
    {
    fn((c instanceof class2)?(class2) c:c);
    }
 
    public static void main(String[] args)
    {
    class1 c1=new class1();
    class2 c2=new class2();
 
    fn2(c2);
    }
}

The output is "class1" (without the quotes). The same results can be had with similar code in C++. Does that seem right to you? It certainly does not seem correct to me.