Some of the "better" philosophers did not read it as their major. (Notably, Wittgenstein was an engineer and allegedly never read up on the Greeks)
My own training was mainly in psychology and pure maths, with "logic and scientific method" as a philosophy component. Graduate work on speech perception involved reading up on the then shift in philosophy towards linguistic issues.
In my experience, any research in perception (especially for publication) really forces the experimenter to consider the dynamics
of interaction of "observer" and "observed" in such detail that lay views of an "objective reality" become as useless as "a flat earth" is to astronauts, despite the fact that "a flat earth" is
useful for our thoughts about local terrestrial travel. From this sketch it should be apparent why I roll my eyes when I hear comments about "reality" as though it's meaning were not context dependent.
( late emphasis having read comments above)
Apologies for the lecture.