Imagine an early emotional ecosystem where behaviors weren't yet standardized. Random individuals might have expressed an internal state (e.g., aggression) in varied ways. Others, also randomly, had different reactions to such expressions. Now suppose two behaviors-say, an aggressive expression (like anger) and a fear response rooted in alertness and self-preservation-accidentally matched, meaning they made sense to each other and reduced conflict. Because those individuals understood each other better, their interactions were more efficient, leading to higher evolutionary fitness. Over time, these behaviors stabilized-not because one caused the other, but because they fit together well.

This challenges the idea that, for example, anger caused fear. If a behavior like "anger expression" evolved without any matching perception system in others, it would have had no communicative value. So maybe such emotional signals and responses co-evolved by chance, and only the combinations that complemented each other survived. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the following: 1. Does this hypothesis sound novel and worth exploring further? 2. Do you think this process is scientifically plausible from an evolutionary standpoint? Any feedback or related thoughts are greatly appreciated.