Is There More to the Story of Biochemical Relevance?

i'm really happy for you that you are actually able to finally publish this paper, especially now that i can fully appreciate the story behind it. And in the paper, you use the term biological relevance to explain this idea. So bears and snakes and spiders are biologicale because they're dangerous, or they can be dangerous. Things like buttons are not, i suppose. I guess they can be, maybe, if a person is afraid of choking on a button or something. But for the most part, they seem to be in a completely different category than snakes and spiders and storms and such. Arehe perhaps other differences in experiences, or in the consequences of emotions that differ along this spectrum of