There seems to be quite a fuss on the issue of whether Dr Patricia Martinez had the right to claim to possess a "PhD in Islam". I must say that I agree with her suggestion that we should ' Get back to the real issue

' (Jan 5), but I also fully support Yamin Cheng concerning Martinez's doubtful claim of having a "PhD in Islam" (' Of Islamic studies and Islamic state ', Jan 4).

Paul Warren's letter (' Writer does not deserve courtesy of reply

', Jan 7), suggesting that Yamin's complaint did not deserve to be taken "seriously", has prompted me to write in her defence.

By saying "For brevity, as do many academics, I simply state that my PhD is in Islam", Martinez seems to be suggesting that academics, in her point of view, tend to ignore the importance of being specific.

As an academic, I must admit that I feel insulted. "Being specific" is, for me, one of the essential qualities of an academic. Having done her studies in the field of religions, Martinez should have had a clear understanding of the dangers of being imprecise.

Moreover, having done "interdisciplinary work" should not have been used as an excuse, as such experiences emphasise further the need to be precise when communicating.

The final point is that a PhD in religion (with specialisation in Islam) is not a PhD in Islam, the same way that a degree in electrical engineering (with specialisation in computers) is not a degree in computer engineering.

From my point of view, Martinez's claim that she had a "PhD in Islam" was misleading, therefore she deserved criticism. (But let us not forget that she has already clarified the matter and urged us to get back to the real issue.)