I agree entirely with 'A Disappointed Reader' (Stop insignificant 'Net-chatroom' debates

, Jan 9). It is needless to dissect Dr Patricia Martinez's Ph D in a hair splitting way. Surely her contributions should be judged on whether they are factual and wise and not on exactly what were the courses of study she undertook formally.

Does anyone mean to say a person cannot expand his/her horizon of knowledge and expertise after graduation?

The renowned philosopher, Jean Paul Sartre, refused to accept the Nobel Prize because he was afraid people would judge his writings on the basis of him being designated a Nobel Laureate by an awards committee rather than on the merit of his essays.

Similarly, Dr Martinez's contributions should be judged for what they are. I personally find them enlightening. If she made any factual errors, certainly the many experts among your readers would have corrected her.

The episode also demonstrates the fatal flaw in the concept of an Islamic state vis--vis democracy. Part of the citizenry will be disenfranchised on the basis that they are not formally trained and, therefore, deemed unqualified to have any input in the decision-making process in law-making.

This will include Muslims who are not theologians. The non-Muslims are of course in a worse position as they are deemed to be non-believers.