the impulse are not to be changed. In man or beast, in savage or
savant, the intense feeling, the marked bodily changes, and the
yearning for action are identical and unchangeable. The brakes can be
put on and the action suppressed, but in that case the end of the
whole process is defeated. Could anything be plainer than that an
instinct and its emotion were never intended to be aroused except in
situations in which their characteristic action is to be desired? An
emotion is the hot part of an instinct and exists solely for securing
action. If all signs of the emotion are to be suppressed, all
expression denied, why the emotion?

But although the emotion and the impulse, once aroused, are beyond
control, there is yet one part of the instinct that is meant to be
controlled. The initial or receptive portion, that which notices a
situation, recognizes it as significant, and sends in the signal for
action, can be trained to discrimination. This is where reason comes
in. If the situation calls for flight, fear is in order; if it calls
for fight, anger is in order; if it calls for examination, wonder is
in order; but if it calls for none of these things, reason should show
some discrimination and refuse to call up the emotion.

=The Right of Way.= There is a law that comes to the aid of reason in
this dilemma and that is the "law of the common path."[7] By this is
meant that man is capable of but one intense emotion at a time. No one
can imagine himself strenuously making love while he is shaken by an
agony of fear, or ravenously eating while he is in a passion of rage.
The stronger emotion gets the right of way, obtains control of mental
and bodily machinery, and leaves no room for opposite states. If the
two emotions are not antagonistic, they may blend together to form a
compound emotion, but if in the nature of the case such a blending is