Can you elaborate on what circumstances you're referring to?

The field is extremely diverse these days, and tools that are appropriate for small data science teams may not work as well in enormous monorepos maintained by thousands of developers (and vice versa). What's missing from most discussions of static/dynamic typing is context—each career is unique and what projects you've worked on will have a huge impact on your perception of which is preferable.

You perfectly illustrated the point: that there are no maxims like the grandparent comment made. Myself, I work on very small teams, usually building applications that are backend-heavy web apps or filled with tons of async background processing on the server. Applications that are funded by revenue, not VC. Applications where I typically have a high degree of autonomy and responsibility as to maintainability, with usually no insulation between me and stakeholders.

Given different parameters, I'm sure the decisions would be different as well.

Oh, for sure, I wasn't endorsing OP's position! I had another recent thread [0] that was full of highly dogmatic claims on my mind, where I noticed that very few people brought in the context for their opinions.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37764326

For quick scripts sure.

For writing an application or something that actually require design and libraries? Why bother? You need to be meticulous anyway, why not be meticulous in code?

Literally every application I work on requires design, libraries, and meticulous code.

The focus for me is on the tools and frameworks, not the underlying language. Show me a Typescript-based or Go-based language that can go from zero to production as fast as Rails with the same-sized team with no productivity loss, and I'd happily use it.