In essence: when the head says one thing, and the heart says another, what is the correct response? this, of course, uses the prevailing somatisation of rational and emotional feelings.
My favoured analysis is that whenever the emotions and the reason are in conflict, do nothing. Ears and whiskers. Trust both, or trust neither.
However, when a decision must be made, I favour the head over the heart. If the head's going wrong, then at least the ways that it goes wrong are for the most part susceptible to rational analysis; when everything's gone wrong, possibly due to one's incorrect decision, then at least it should be possible to understand why, and to learn from that in order to avoid making the same mistake. Emotions, at least for me, by being irrational are necessarily not susceptible to analysis, since all my analytic capabilities work solely on words and word-like structures, and anything which is convertible to words will get handled by my intellect, and thus can't be emotional. Failures due to incorrect emotional urges cannot be analysed, and cannot be learned from.
The consequence is, of course, that since I do pay attention to my mistakes of reasoning, and profit by them, my rational judgement steadily improves; since I can't learn when my emotions are mistaken, I can't improve my emotional judgements. Thus I increasingly favour my head over my heart when I must decide between the two.