"looking to get into..." -- No, not at all. It will lead you down a long rabbit hole that doesn't actually wind up anywhere too close to functional programming.

"looking to get into..." -- No, not at all. It will lead you down a long rabbit hole that doesn't actually wind up anywhere too close to functional programming. CT is great for "looking to get really good at" FP. It writes out a parallel universe where certain things are easier and certain things are harder but the same core pillars of FP are intact. In this parallel universe there are myriad examples of constructions, techniques, and conceptual frameworks which can be "ported" back to FP. Likewise, some FP concepts have interesting "ported" versions in CT. Learn CT when you want to build intuition for how to construct functional architecture. Don't learn it to start and don't even learn it when you run into Functor/Applicative/Monad. It's _not_ useful for understanding them in practical terms. Go learn it when you start composing higher level constructions together comfortably and start running into questions about the most efficient ways to lay things out. It's _great_ for that.