Passion, Reason, Adaptation

The primary flaw of Hume's formulation 'Reason is the slave of the Passions' is, as Kant proposes, that 'Reason' is ambiguous in it--it probably connotes 'Instrumental Reason', but not what Kant calls 'Pure Practical Reason'. Accordingly, a second flaw emerges--the image 'is the slave of', glosses over, at best, the relation between a Passion and Instrumental Reason.  Presumably, a more precise analysis of the formulation is: 'In the pursuit of an End, a Passion uses Instrumental Reason to determine a Means'.  Instrumental Reason can function in this way, because it is the source of the connection of Perceptions, i. e. the source of an 'A causes B', which, used by a Passion, can convert into 'A is a Means to B', with B the pursued End.  But, this analysis exposes what remains unexplained and unaddressed in Reason-Passion debate--the conversion of an inference from observation, to an ingredient in behavior.  Now, Evolutionism supplies a potential explanation--such a conversion is an instance of Adaptation-Of, i. e. an appropriation, by an Organism, of some feature of its Environment, e. g. the appropriation of the observed connectivity of fire and a burning object, to produce something edible.  So, according to an Evolutionist model of behavior, Instrumental Reason is organically related to the principle that motivates, a relation that is falsified by, first, the Passion-Reason split, and, second, by the representation of it in terms of an Economic antithesis.