TY - JOUR
T1 - Intellectual spring cleaning
T2 - it’s time for a military “Do Not Read” list; and some sources that should be on that list
AU - Jackson, Aaron P.
AU - Zweibelson, Ben
AU - Simonds, William
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2018/4/3
Y1 - 2018/4/3
N2 - Military reading lists, intended to promote professional reading and in turn enhance education and develop critical thinking skills and sound judgement, recommend key texts to military personnel. This is a noble intent but the lists themselves, while generally good, are not flawless. Critiques of military reading lists often focus on what sources they are missing. This article offers its own critique but from a different perspective. It does so by analysing why some sources, which have become outdated, are based on faulty or incomplete research, have been thoroughly disproven, or some combination of the above, nevertheless linger on military reading lists. It then offers a short list of such sources, which it recommends be either removed from existing reading lists or accompanied by other sources that place the original source in appropriate historical context. Where applicable, it also recommends alternative sources that provide insights into the same subject matter. In so doing, this article is intended generate debate and to assist militaries to achieve a better balance between evaluation, induction and retention of valid knowledge on one hand, and rejection of outdated or flawed knowledge on the other.
AB - Military reading lists, intended to promote professional reading and in turn enhance education and develop critical thinking skills and sound judgement, recommend key texts to military personnel. This is a noble intent but the lists themselves, while generally good, are not flawless. Critiques of military reading lists often focus on what sources they are missing. This article offers its own critique but from a different perspective. It does so by analysing why some sources, which have become outdated, are based on faulty or incomplete research, have been thoroughly disproven, or some combination of the above, nevertheless linger on military reading lists. It then offers a short list of such sources, which it recommends be either removed from existing reading lists or accompanied by other sources that place the original source in appropriate historical context. Where applicable, it also recommends alternative sources that provide insights into the same subject matter. In so doing, this article is intended generate debate and to assist militaries to achieve a better balance between evaluation, induction and retention of valid knowledge on one hand, and rejection of outdated or flawed knowledge on the other.
KW - Military reading lists
KW - knowledge evaluation
KW - knowledge rejection
KW - knowledge retention
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045897248&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/14702436.2018.1461563
DO - 10.1080/14702436.2018.1461563
M3 - Article
SN - 1470-2436
VL - 18
SP - 131
EP - 146
JO - Defence Studies
JF - Defence Studies
IS - 2
ER -