We had an earthquake in the Bay Area this week. It was in Berkeley, a couple of miles from where I live.
Not a big one – I think the US Geological Survey finally pegged it as 4.3 – but it did rattle things enough to wake us up at 2:56 a.m.
It was on the Hayward fault, which runs down the East Bay. There hasn’t been a big earthquake on the Hayward since the 19th century, which is to say that we’re overdue for one. I’m grateful that the building I live in had a pretty thorough seismic upgrade awhile back, at least one that’s good enough for smaller quakes. But of course, it hasn’t been tested by the “Big One,” as we say in these parts.
Quite a few years ago I listened to an audiobook in which the author — I’ve forgotten both his name and the name of the book — said that one of the first stages of an advanced civilization was the ability to control the weather. And while earthquakes aren’t exactly weather, I’m pretty sure controlling them would come under that idea as well.
Obviously, we humans here on Earth aren’t anywhere close to that. In trying to find the book by searching online, I ran across other scientists analyzing where Earth might be in terms of attaining any level of advanced civilization.
In general, we don’t reach even Level 1 on most scales. Carl Sagan put us at 0.7. From what I recall of the audiobook, it also had us below Level 1.
In my very cursory search, it appears that the core theory is called the Kardashev Scale, from the Russian scientist Nikolai Kardashev, who came up with it. It defines civilizations based on their control of energy, starting first on the planet, then from a star, and finally from the galaxy.
When I read this, it makes me think of a lot of hype from the broligarch crowd, who are apparently convinced that if we just buy into their idea of creating artificial general intelligence by stuffing all the written works of the world into LLMs, we will magically create something that can harness the sun and leap to the more advanced levels.
Even if the real scientists are right about what constitutes advanced civilizations – and I’m not convinced – I’m pretty sure the current crop of techlords are not going to be the people pull this off.
At the moment, though, I’m more interested in the belief that “controlling” the weather – and earthquakes – is the first step.
I’ve recently read the last book from James C. Scott, which is called In Praise of Floods. In it, he points out the folly of controlling rivers, focusing in particular on the Ayeyarwady, a huge river in Burma, though the Mississippi also comes in for a mention.
The trouble with controlling rivers is that sooner or later the controls give way, and you end up with extreme floods that do a great deal of damage. The book leaves you with the idea that allowing the river to dictate its path is better in the long run, even though that means you cannot use large amounts of land on a full time basis.
In addition to being prone to earthquakes, California gets a lot of fires. And, in fact, a great deal of the landscape around here actually needs to burn regularly to keep it healthy. The original human inhabitants figured this out, and developed ceremonial burning, among other practices.
But over the last few hundred years – since European colonization, starting with the Spanish and magnified by the Americans who moved west – we’ve had policies of suppressing fires. In the end, it has led to fires that are much more destructive.
As with floods, the fact that we humans have settled in this landscape and tried to force it to serve our needs makes everything worse.
I’m starting to think that an advanced civilization isn’t one that controls the weather, but rather one that understands it well enough to live in balance with the way the planet works.
Earthquakes are necessary. Floods are necessary. Fires are necessary. Seasonal changes are necessary.
What isn’t necessary is widespread destruction and loss of life from such things. The more we understand what the patterns ought to be, the better we can set up human infrastructure that works with them.
That is, instead of trying to control the natural forces of the planet, we figure out how to live with them.
That includes earthquakes. There’s an alert system for earthquakes these days. Your cell phone goes off when there’s a big enough one nearby.
A couple of years ago there was a 4 point something down closer to San Jose. I got the alert and then I felt the wave from the earthquake.
The other morning, though, the alert came after the building shook. The warning system isn’t good enough yet for something close by.
I’m pretty sure that if scientists can keep studying earthquakes – I hope that’s not a big assumption in these days of assault on scientific research – the warnings will get better. But that’s not going to stop earthquakes.
And it probably shouldn’t.
I think being civilized would mean we humans understand that the earth and all the natural world are not a setting for humans to live on but living beings that have been around much longer than we have. We could learn about balance and harmony by paying attention to nature. Being civilized would mean not controlling, as you say, but living with. Interbeing, as Thich Nhat Hanh calls it. Maybe we could apply that to other people as well, if we were truly civilized.
Yeah, I’m definitely leaning toward the idea that true advanced civilizations live in balance on their planet and with the other beings there, including each other. There’s a reason a lot of my daily senryu end with the phrase “not civilized yet.”