Philip Nickel

Philip NickelPhilip Nickel received his doctorate in 2002 from the University of California, Los Angeles, studying with Barbara Herman, Seana Shiffrin and Tyler Burge.  From 2003 to 2008 he was Assistant Professor in the Department of Philosophy and the School of Biological Sciences at the University of California, Irvine.  Nickel’s areas of specialization are moral epistemology, the ethics of belief, and applied ethics.  He is the author of articles on trust, epistemic agency, and the ethics of biomedical research.  He is currently working on the ethics and epistemology of trust as applied to technological artifacts.

Visit Philip Nickel’s personal website


Sander Voerman

me-mediumSander Voerman specializes in various philosophical topics that involve human agency: ethics, responsibility, selfhood, and the ethical and conceptual aspects of health and illness. He wrote his PhD thesis (Tilburg University, 2012) on the psychological nature of normative reasons. Voerman also published a textbook about the free will debate (Lemniscaat, 2011) that is currently being used in Dutch high schools. As of 2013 he is appointed as a post-doctoral researcher at Eindhoven University of Technology to work on the Medical Trust Beyond Clinical Walls project.

Visit Sander Voerman’s personal website


Felicitas Kraemer

KraemerFelicitas Kraemer is an assistant professor of philosophy & ethics who works on the ethics of medical technologies. New medical technologies are used to treat and diagnose disease. These new possibilities raise new ethical questions: is it morally responsible to keep people in long term comas alive? How should we deal with new neuro-technologies such as, e.g., brain-machine interfaces that connect human brains to computers or robotic arms? Which problems do new diagnostic possibilities give rise to and how much money should society spend on individuals’ treatment? Another urgent question is that of human “enhancement”. We can “improve” the human body and brain via new medications and technologies. Think of new “life-style drugs” that help healthy people feel even better or athletes to enhance their performance. Where should we draw a line here? Is everything that is technically possible also morally acceptable? I am also interested in research ethics and am a member of the ethics committees of two hospitals. An important question that arises in this context is how we should treat subjects on whom new drugs and technologies are being tested.


Wijnand IJsselsteijn

wijnand2Wijnand IJsselsteijn is full professor in Cognition and Affect in Human-Technology Interaction at Eindhoven University of Technology. He has a background in artificial intelligence and cognitive neuropsychology, and a PhD in human-computer interaction, on the topic of telepresence. His research focus is on conceptualizing and measuring human experiences in relation to advanced media environments (immersive media, serious games, affective computing) in the service of human learning, health, and wellbeing. He has a keen interest in technological innovations (e.g., sensor-enabled mobile technologies, virtual environments) that make possible novel forms of human behaviour tracking, combining methodological rigor with ecological validity.


Masi Mohammadi

MasiAssistant Professor in the department of Public Health Engineering for the Built Environment at Eindhoven University of Technology.