I disagree. I think a good background in Critical theory is important and that self criticism and self analysis are key to improving your own work in any art form including photography.
I'd been making images for over 20 years and working in photography professionally, also commissioning work from other photographers before changing direction in 1986. I'd done very little personal work between 76-86 mainly die to lack of time.
So from 1986 onwards I began re-evaluating my personal work and soon decided on some major changes, th edecision, at the same timew I began reading Critical theory books. They made sense and as I began making new bodies of work I actually found it easier to make the work I wanted.
It's not just what you photograph, it's what are you trying to say, who or what is your audience, and every now and again it's necessary to re-evaluate.
Maybe the most important dedision I made was to produce bodies of work, coherent possible exhibition sets, that definitely came from reading numerous books, theory and mongraphs.
The changes in direction and reading Critical theory, then going on workshops (Peter Goldfield, Pail Hill, Peter Catrell, Fay Godwin & John Blakemore), just confirmed I was going in the right direction. About 10 yeas later I decided I wanted to learn more about contextualising my work, it was years since my last academic study and I made a decision to go back to University and study Industrial Archaeology (my work had gone in that direction). Later 2001-3 I did an MA in Photography, ultimately that came down to being able to analyse your own work, contextualise it with reards to photography/photographers as awhole, work to chosen criteria.
The bottom line is that I'd chosen the right way for myself in the late 1980's, I'm critical of my own work, edit quite ruthlessly. I'm lucky that I've mingled with like minded photographers who's opinions I respect and that has helped as well.
Ian