the case of the hunting gregarious animal strength in
pursuit and attack is at once increased beyond that of the creatures
preyed upon, and in protective socialism the sensitiveness of the new
unit to alarms is greatly in excess of that of the individual member of
the flock.

To secure these advantages of homogeneity, it is evident that the
members of the herd must possess sensitiveness to the behavior of their
fellows. The individual isolated will be of no meaning; the individual
as part of the herd will be capable of transmitting the most potent
impulses. Each member of the flock tending to follow his neighbor, and
in turn to be followed, each is in some sense capable of leadership; but
no lead will be followed that departs widely from normal behavior. A
lead will only be followed from its resemblance to the normal. If the
leader go so far ahead as definitely to cease to be in the herd, he will
necessarily be ignored.

The original in conduct, that is to say, resistiveness to the voice of
the herd, will be suppressed by natural selection; the wolf which does
not follow the impulses of the herd will be starved; the sheep which
does not respond to the flock will be eaten.

Again, not only will the individual be responsive to impulses coming
from the herd but he will treat the herd as his normal environment. The
impulse to be in and always to remain with the herd will have the
strongest instinctive weight. Anything which tends to separate him from
his fellows, as soon as it becomes perceptible as such, will be strongly
resisted.

So far we have regarded the gregarious animal objectively. Let us now
try to estimate the mental aspects of these impulses. Suppose a species
in possession of precisely the instinctive endowments which we have been
considering to be also self-conscious, and let us ask what will be the
forms under which these phenomena will present themselves in its mind.
In the first place, it is quite evident that impulses derived from herd
feeling will enter the mind with the value of instincts--they will
present themselves as "a priori syntheses of the most perfect sort
needing no proof but their own evidence." They will not, however, it is
important to remember, necessarily always give this quality to the same
specific acts, but will show this great distinguishing characteristic
that they may give to any opinion whatever the characters of instinctive
belief, making it into an "a priori synthesis"; so tha