Human attitudes to various nonhuman animals have varied considerably\nacross cultures and throughout time. While some of our responses are\nundoubtedly instinctive and universal-a visceral fear of large\ncarnivores or the feeling of spontaneous warmth for creatures exhibiting\nhigh degrees of neoteny-it is clear that our attitude toward specific\nspecies is largely shaped by our innate anthropomorphism: that is, when\nwe think about animals, we are also thinking about ourselves. There are\nfew better examples of this than the shifting attitudes toward whales\nand dolphins throughout the 20th century, (...) particularly among citizens of\nWestern democracies. This article narrates the cultural history of this\ndevelopment and demonstrates how the current enchantment with whales and\ndolphins is primarily the result of two broad-and related-cultural\ndevelopments: the modern entertainment complex, particularly cinema,\ntelevision, and aquatic theme parks; and the 1960s counterculture, with\nits potent blend of holistic ecology, speculative neuroscience, and\nmysticism. The result was the creation of what we might think of as the\n``metaphysical whale,{''} a creature who has inspired the abolitionist\nstance toward whaling. (shrink)

For the past seventy years, a host of scientific and public health bodies in the United States have strongly endorsed the practice of adding fluoride compounds to public water supplies as a prophylactic against dental caries. Throughout that period, a constant undercurrent of skepticism and outright opposition has slowed the adoption of the practice in the United States and limited its spread to just a handful of countries around the world. One of the attractions of water fluoridation is its affordability: (...) the fluoride compounds are sourced from the phosphate and aluminum industries, for whom they would otherwise constitute an annoying toxic waste disposal problem. Despite this, proponents have nonetheless succeeded in shaping a narrative that casts fluoridation as “natural” or at least mimicking nature. I demonstrate how fluoridationists were able to persuasively argue that adding a pollutant to the water supply was safe and natural. In the process, I examine how environmental historians and historians of science approach topics such as fluoridation. I suggest that as a result of the influence of science and technology studies and an ontological turn toward hybridity, the two subdisciplines are becoming increasingly convergent. (shrink)