There's a difference between a concrete example and a familiar metaphor. I think the former is extremely important for learning. I think the latter usually lead

There's a difference between a concrete example and a familiar metaphor. I think the former is extremely important for learning. I think the latter usually leads instead to a false feeling of understanding that then leads to completely off base conclusions (my favorite example for this on HN is mathematical philosophy, e.g. Godel's incompleteness theorems). Hence while concrete examples of monads are very important for learning the abstract pattern behind them, I agree with the article that abstract analogies usually do more harm than good.