Learning group in the abstract, followed quickly by many examples of groups, is in my own opinion the best way to learn about groups. But this isn't quite gener

Learning group in the abstract, followed quickly by many examples of groups, is in my own opinion the best way to learn about groups. But this isn't quite general -> specific, this is general -> example, example, example. I think this is where a lot of the Haskell explanations fall down, since they start with (definition of functor) -> example, example, example; then go into (definition of natural transformation) -> (no examples), and the problems multiply from there.