May I change your Mind?

Eckart Wintzen: a philosophy with a return.

"Man did not weave the web of life - he is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself."
Chief Seattle, 1854.

He is a veteran of information technology. A visionary businessman. A wealthy rebel without disguise, combining passion and rational effectiveness in a very unusual package that radiates authority, intuition and depth. That man is Eckart Wintzen, introduced on http://www.extent.nl as the nerdy adventurer which he is not, by answering the question "who the FAQ is Eckart Wintzen?"

"Eck's just an ordinary bloke who built BSO/ Origin (a software company) from 10 to 10.000 employees. He looks kinda distinguished (say: freaky) with his long grey hair and he's always been a little bit of an enfant terrible of the Dutch business world, being the first to publish environmental reports and using his Cell Theory to grow the company which contributed to thousands of dedicated happy employees. He drives a Toyota Yaris, wears jeans and spends a lot of his time and energy to get Holland at the forefront of broadband Internet."

I arrived at the farmhouse "Bosschuur d'Ouwe Kamp", home to 'Ex'tent Green Venture Capital', after spending an hour on the crowded conveyor belt called 'highway' that took me here from Shiphol Airport. Ex'tent's offices are located in the middle of a beautifully wooded nowhere; you can get there only by car, bicycle, horseback, or a brisk 5 km walk from the nearest train station.

When we meet, Eckart is alert, sharp, and full of purpose. Eckart is on a mission. A clear one. Simple in its words, clear in its goals, and overwhelmingly difficult to achieve, that mission is to help change the world:

"Ex'tent is a venture capital company that puts funding into innovative, growing businesses in exchange for equity. Ex'tent is not your ordinary VC, though, where profits are all that matters. Ex'tent invests in companies that contribute to change our current economy into a less material one. From each project we want financial, social and environmental returns. We like to call our mission Green, and Friendly for people, planet and profit."

Will the world change? If it will, how? Should the world change? If so, how can that be done?

These are the questions that frame the conversation granted to me as part of the research for my book 'Digital Twins', that discusses the ways in which technology, especially digital technology, is changing the foundations of reality, eroding the cornerstones of social institutions, and gnawing at the fabric of our lives. At least in the opinion of this author. I suggest that my questions will move in the triangle that has 'investing', 'information technology' and 'the future of family life' as its enclosing sides. Eckart nods. I take it, he agrees. Let's start by taking a bird's eye view at the economy at large.

Our Western economy operates in a wholesale conflict with the future of our planet, and therefore, in conflict with the future of human life itself. We eliminate natural resources at an accelerating pace, without - in the most literal sense - accounting for them. We don't pay for them, we don't even account for their replacement value. In the early 90's I already proposed to put a value on resources that we take from nature, and use that estimated value as a basis for taxation. Without such taxation, and without the legal anchoring of the value of natural resources, nobody is going to invest - at the scale necessary - in new energy technologies. And without it, the management of the planet will not receive the attention, and the money, that is needed for a sustainable future of humanity. Without it, the planet can go on, humanity can not.

Is there a way to turn that around?

Changing the mindset of people is the only way. Preach it from the pulpit, write articles and books, speeches, a new kind of political leader. The vital importance of the planet and its resources that nature created over billions of years, has to become part of the mindset of every citizen, before anything fundamental will change. And that is not about to happen, because everybody is scared to loose part of his/her wealth.
I am skeptical, but I do believe in the flexibility, the changeability of people's minds. If you truly understand your own feelings, and truly know what you say and what you choose, and why you do it, then you know that material possession does not have the priority in your life that it seems to have. That requires a change of mind, a spiritual transformation.
What is prosperity, anyway? We commonly equate well-being with prosperity, while most of us feel this to be untrue. If we look at 'prosperity', we see that it accounts for 85% of our economy.

In an article entitled 'Prosperity, economy and mobility', Eckart explains: "The Romans already formulated precisely what the economy is all about: "Bread and Games". 15% of our economy consists of satisfying the bottom level of Maslow's pyramid of human needs: food, shelter and reproduction. On top of that, the economy produces the toys that we use to play, and the games that go with it, be it "surfing the net", "looking good", "going on vacation", or "personal community service". For Eckart, it is the experience that counts, not the possession. What we do and how we feel about it, not what we have. That top 85% of the economy, resting on the foundation of providing the means for a basic human existence, is where most of us spend their working lives:

"As serious as we might take the work we do, let's admit that all of us participate in an economic activity that caters to games and toys. And that is a good thing, because it is where we find the opportunities for human spiritual growth, where we can deploy our true talents and express our creative human nature."

Eckart observes how the true reward for 'being human' is the experiences we create for ourselves or the experiences we encounter, not the mere possession of physical goods. The playing, not the toy, is the name of the game. Games require the stimulation of our senses. We gain new experiences through those senses, from the outside in, or - through memory - from the inside out. Our senses are the channels that create our experiences; these experiences determine our well-being. And therein lays the opportunity for change:

Once we have separated the 'bread' and the 'games' portions of the economy, and once we have discovered the true nature of what constitutes well-being, we can start creating goods and services that are better geared towards human experience, and that - at the same time - are less disastrous to the planet that enables our living, and our economy. With current technology, especially digital technology, we now have the tremendous opportunity to cater to the non-material stimulation of our senses, be it wireless communication, the internet or the entertainment industry.

This type of wellbeing is the target of Ex'tent's investment strategy. We want to move electrons, not atoms. We want to create experiences, not goods for the mere sake of possession. Our financial participation in Ex'ovision is just one example of such an investment.

Ex'ovision is a Dutch company, with a 90% ownership of Ex'tent, developing a next generation of video telephony. "At Ex'tent, we look forward to a world where you no longer need thousands of tons of steel to fly two kilos of brains to a business meeting. At home, this new species of video telephony will add great value to the communication between family, friends and relatives. For example, imagine a child in hospital keeping in touch with home through video-telephony."

Ex'ovision increases mental mobility by moving electrons, and minimizes physical transportation. We want to make investments that influence human experiences, and - hopefully - change what humans perceive as 'value', thus minimizing the need for the ruination of our natural resources. Take 'Bodyshop', the US based store-chain that offers body care products, targeting the human experience of 'feeling well' and 'looking good'. All its products are based on natural, renewable resources. They cater to a non-material need of people using material products that are made from natural, renewable resources. We would like to change the way people communicate, thereby changing the way they view themselves and the world, and because of that, change their behavior. I believe it to be the only way for our survival as a human race. Gaia will survive, with our without us. We can not survive without Gaia. Only a spiritual transformation can save us from self-destruction. A transformation that brings our focus back to the things that matter to us, the things that make us truly happy.

For Eckart, Gaia is the name for a living planet Earth. Everything on it, in it, and outside of it, is a connected totality: a living entity that takes care of itself, and is not-dependant on the participation of a particular type of organisms like human beings. If humanity disappear, and the potential for human happiness with it, Gaia will evolve anew, just like it did before, when it recovered from almost total extinction of life at least 5 times in its 5 billion year history. The continuation of humanity, according to Eckart, will depend on a rediscovery of what human happiness is. As he explains in his December 2000 article:

"When we stop and think about it, it is madness to ravage a whole planet the way we do for what we take to be happiness, while a true feeling of happiness usually 'pervades' us without spending a dime: the first springtime sunshine, the hours you can't put down a book, the arms of a loved one around you …. Why are we so pre-occupied with this so-called 'progress'???"

Isn't this change, this spiritual transformation, dependent on a fundamental change in our educational system? Eckart looks at me as if I just made a particularly inappropriate remark.

No! It's not the educational system only. Vastly more important is the system we are part of. We are educated by TV, more than in our schools. We are educated by all the corporate marketing campaigns, more than by the seminars we attend. What shoes do I wear today, black or white ones? Who should be my idol today? We are 'educated' by our communication with other people throughout our lives. We learn as very young children what is good and what is bad by punishment and reward. That is how our minds form their way of thinking. It starts the moment we are born. In our western economy, we are tangled up in the web that we call society, a creation of our own making. What is it that we should need, what we are supposed to desire? Society, and all its manifestations teach that to us. School is only a small part of that.

But you do believe in the changeability of the human mind?

Yes, I do. But it might turn out to be too difficult to do. We are too much a prisoner of our way of thinking. I'm skeptical about the reality of such a change. Through our investments we try to contribute, though. That's what Ex'tent is about: an economy where everybody benefits in a fair way from its fruits, with less waste of natural resources.

Natural resources are owned by the one who happens to live on top of them - quite literally. Can people change their mind about that, too? After all, if you see the planet as Gaia, they would be a part of a world that is owned by nobody, but humanity collectively?

To answer that I only need to remind you of the words of Chief Seattle in 1851: "How can you own the air?"

Chief Seattle was chief of the Suquamish around Puget Sound - an elaborate bay in the Pacific Ocean with a plethora of islands in the vicinity of Seattle, the city that is named after him. In 1851, Chief Seattle delivered a speech that is considered to be one of the most beautiful and profound environmental statements ever made. The speech was made in response to a proposed treaty under which the Indians were persuaded to sell two million acres of land for $150,000. The speech starts with these words:

"How can you buy or sell the sky, the warmth of the land? The idea is strange to us.

If we do not own the freshness of the air and the sparkle of the water, how can you buy them?

Every part of this earth is sacred to my people. Every shining pine needle, every sandy shore, every mist in the dark woods, every clearing and humming insect is holy in the memory and experience of my people…."

The sound of Chief Seattle's words spoken by Eckart has a tinge of irritation because I failed to remember them. Now, the return to the present seems quite a leap.

What about the role of science? Evolutionary theory clearly shows change to be the essence of everything in nature. A process that continues to play a role, not only in a biological sense, or in as the accelerating expansion of the universe, but also in the development of the human mind. That is the core message of my book 'Digital Sprit'. Doesn't science have a responsibility to communicate its best explanation of reality? What about the role of religion? Isn't there a tremendous opportunity for religion to create change, and help define a new set of values and guidelines to live our lives?

I don't believe that religion - at least our western religions - will take that opportunity. They don't even see it. They are withdrawing on the positions of age-old never changing doctrines. They are too much a part of the culture that forges our worldview. Science? People don't want to listen! Over the last 15 years, I have visited indigenous people in South America, Indonesia and China. They possess hardly anything, just like animals own nothing. But they live in harmony with their tribes, and with nature that surrounds them. You see, they are simply happy. They don't need the explanations of science or our western religions. Our religion might be an obstacle, rather than a solution. Our mind is the instrument that understands the world, and we are trained to see a materialistic one. That is where our investments intend to create change. With our 'Greenwheels' project, you don't need to own a car, yet you can get to where you want to be. The same experience for your mind, yet without the waste of resources and money of owning a car.

What about the internet that makes all of human knowledge, and every expression of human emotion accessible to everybody on the planet? Through scientific knowledge captured in software, everybody on the planet can use it. For good, or for bad. With that knowledge, a single person will be able in the future to destroy the planet, for example with the help of future molecular technology. On the other hand, the emerging digital reality mirrors every culture and way of thinking on the planet. Will that not change people's mindset?

The prospect of a single idiot creating destruction on a global scale is frightening, yet real. Technology? As a means of getting the message out, it can be important. As an agent of change in its own right? I believe that to be wishful thinking. On the contrary, society today has to continuously keep up with the newest technology. If you come back from vacation, you will probably be outdated when it comes to technology and the latest gadgets it has produced.

So many things are changing through technology. I do believe that technology does change the way we view the world. Take the technology of birth-control. Since the late fifties, its availability apparently changed the way we think about children and family. The industrialized west is expected to loose hundreds of millions - in Europe alone - of its traditional 'white Christian members' without replacing them. With the average birthrate at 1.4, that changes the fabric of western society. More importantly, doesn't that change the view of the family as the 'cornerstone' of society? And what about the view on sex, when sexual intercourse has lost its monopoly on delivering DNA because of biotechnology?

The family as 'cornerstone of society' became a fiction already. The speed at which people's mind can change is sometimes astonishing. New experiences in individual lives can drive partners in a marriage apart quickly. Who can predict how partners think, 15 years from now? Partners can drift apart, and separate. Sex has nothing to do with it. Sex follows the mindset, not vice versa. The secret of 'family' is loyalty and commitment of both parents to their children, without invoking stress because of the parent's separation. Yes, we will have genetically 'enhanced' children, but I don't foresee a serious threat to natural reproduction.

The crossroads we face in society is a spiritual one. We either get ahead of technology, or we are doomed to self destruction. We are facing a cusp in history, at which spiritual development needs to take over and spirituality becomes the engine of progress. Our task then is to gently persuade people to spirituality by showing alternative ways to find fulfillment in their lives. Yes, I believe it is possible to change people's views, but it will be slow, and the media would have to be changed along with it. Maybe we need more Ghandis, Daila Lamas, or Tutos to invoke such change. I am a businessman, not a preacher. And that's where I am doing my part to help - through the use of venture capital - persuade people to adopt a different state of mind.

What if you would have another life after this one, would you come back as a businessman, again, or as a preacher? There is a slight moment of hesitation.

A businessman.

I can't abandon the feeling that Eckart Wintzen is both, maybe even with a slight preference for the preacher, or better: the evangelist. We all have our passion, and our own - sometimes very different - way to express that passion, or so it seems.

I like that, if true. One thing, however, is certain: Chief Seattle's words ring through, even in the 'western' words of Eckart.