112 INSTINCT 
Morgan, ‘according as the animal has eggs or not suggests 
intelligence; but,” he adds—and this seems to me to be a 
more probable conclusion—that “it may be instinct varying 
according to the conditions of stimulation.” 
Varied activity under unfavorable conditions charac- 
terizes alike the behavior of the Protozoa and the most 
highly evolved animals. While not involving intelligence 
it performs, in a measure, the function of intelligence, as it 
gives the animal greater opportunities for making favorable 
adjustments. “Nature,” says James, “implants contrary 
impulses to act in many classes of things, and leaves it to 
slight alterations of the conditions of the individual case to 
decide which impulse shall carry the day. Thus greediness 
and suspicion, curiosity and timidity, coyness and desire, 
bashfulness and vanity, sociability and pugnacity seem to 
shoot over into each other as quickly, and to remain in as 
unstable equilibrium, in the higher birds and mammals as 
in man. They are all impulses, completely blind at first, 
and productive of motor reactions of a rigorously deter- 
minate sort. Hach of them, then, 1s an instinct, as instincts 
are commonly defined. But they contradict each other— 
‘experience’ in each particular opportunity of application 
usually deciding the issue. The animal that exhibits them 
loses the instinctive demeanor and appears to lead a life of 
hesitation and choice, an intellectual life, not, however, 
because he has no instincts—rather because he has so many 
of them that they block each other’s path.” 
At its first appearance intelligence is able to modify but 
slightly the course of instinctive behavior. It is a faculty 
which, as Hobhouse remarks, “arises within the sphere of 
instinct’’ and is devoted to the task of enabling the instinc- 
tive proclivities of the animal to work themselves out more 
effectively. The close connection of intelligence and instinct 
