A great many TV pundits, etc. of late have bragged about how unread they are. Others have bragged about reading their gender studies and diversity books while bailing on the Western classics.
I remember not too long ago reading about a much praised liberal who wrote a much praised book that no one actually read, but claimed to read, who himself said he did not know who Augustine was.
People like that are always encountering new ideas and wrestling with those ideas when the ideas turn out to be old and already resolved.
Donald Trump’s new Secretary of Defense nominee, General James Mattis, was asked about reading before he headed into Iraq in 2004.
We have been fighting on this planet for 5000 years and we should take advantage of their experience. “Winging it” and filling body bags as we sort out what works reminds us of the moral dictates and the cost of incompetence in our profession. As commanders and staff officers, we are coaches and sentries for our units: how can we coach anything if we don’t know a hell of a lot more than just the [Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures]? What happens when you’re on a dynamic battlefield and things are changing faster than higher [Headquarters] can stay abreast? Do you not adapt because you cannot conceptualize faster than the enemy’s adaptation? (Darwin has a pretty good theory about the outcome for those who cannot adapt to changing circumstance — in the information age things can change rather abruptly and at warp speed, especially the moral high ground which our regimented thinkers cede far too quickly in our recent fights.) And how can you be a sentinel and not have your unit caught flat-footed if you don’t know what the warning signs are — that your unit’s preps are not sufficient for the specifics of a tasking that you have not anticipated?
You really should read his whole response.
Maybe Tomi Lahren will take note of it.