A man standing with his daughter dropped a Kinder-Joy. Standing nearby, Peter could not resist picking it up and handing it back to him. The man gave a slightly hesitant reply at first, but then looked happy and thanked Peter with genuine gratitude. Peter is not someone who typically jumps to the conclusion that every minor discomfort warrants help. His defense has always been that if he were in that position, he would prefer people to leave him alone. Yet, Peter did it anyway, and he has been wondering about the reason ever since. For one, it may be that he was simply too close to ignore it. The man would have seen him and might have judged him, and there were other bystanders around as well; perhaps Peter just couldn't stand the potential negative judgment. But in theory... he doesn’t care! Thus, impulses arise that he hasn't yet trained his mind to resist. Another hypothesis is that he knew it would make the man happy. So, is there an inherent need to make others happy? But why should there be? Because making others happy, in turn, makes him happy. But why is he happy? Is it because he was the direct cause of another person's joy? Peter feels useful for having contributed something positive to the world. But how does he even know the man was genuinely happy? Peter himself would find it intrusive or almost patronizing if someone helped him with something so minor, yet he knows he would still smile politely out of social obligation. What guarantee is there that this man wasn't just doing the same? Peter convinces himself that the man was too focused on his daughter to overthink it. But that's only because of the distraction; without it, the scenario might have pushed the man into the awkward position of feeling like he owed Peter a favor. Above all, Peter couldn't possibly have thought through all of this in that split second of impulse. So, what was the actual rationalization on his part? (Gratitude, at least, is what the man projected—a positive reaction that, for once, pushed Peter's valid doubts aside.) Or perhaps Peter did it because it elevates his image in the eyes of a stranger: Peter, "the good guy" in a world full of selfish people. Peter knows he will likely never see this man again, but he still loves the idea of being perceived as great; it keeps his internal reputation intact. Although this stranger will have zero influence on Peter's actual public image, the self-image he has so carefully constructed—without ever consciously doing so—maintains its coherence. Once again, he acts to establish harmony between his inner and outer self. I could have just asked Peter, but I have never met him. Even if I tried to find and interview him, he would probably give me an answer that would just leave me hovering around with more questions. This scheme is bound to fail. Instead, let's just form hypotheses!

P.S.  Peter must have done it for his sheer quest of appreciation. We all do it at some point of time_ From someone very smart