Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suggest you read SICP and gain an appreciation for higher-order functions. Once you do, you will probably have answered your own question. http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/
Why would zo1 want to read SICP? zo1 is clearly quite happy with Python's named functions, and has no immediate incentive to "read SICP and gain an appreciation for higher-order functions."
Faced with squeezing an explanation into a limited post or recommending one of the best books on computer science (written by teachers with many years experience in teaching these self-same principles), should I not recommend the book that will allow the poster to expand his/her horizons?
The poster was sufficiently motivated to ask the question. I was willing to post what I believed at the time to be the best answer to the question. If the poster's desire to know is sufficient, then he/she will take the time to explore the suggestion. If not, then things will stay as they are. In either case, my only interaction is my choice to share a suggestion or remain silent.