5 . Psychological science is full of interesting topics, many of which tell a coherent picture of human nature, but some of which create seemingly contradictory stories. A case in point is the misunderstood overlap(交叠) between strength­based science and the research on narcissism (自恋).

There is now convincing evidence to show that narcissism is on the rise, especially in our youth. Some researchers say that about 25% of young people showing symptoms of narcissism.

We are correct to be concerned about this phenomenon, but our fear that all kids are potential narcissists has caused an unhelpful reaction against approaches that seek to make our children and teens feel good about themselves.

In my own research on strength­based parenting, it is common for people to wrongly think this approach to be the cause of narcissism. Their argument seems to be that a child who knows their strengths will automatically view themselves as better than everyone else. It is argued that the self­assurance that comes with identifying and using their positive qualities will make a child selfish and uncaring.

Why does this occur? It’s partly because more is known about narcissism than strengths. While strengths psychology has largely stayed within the limit of academic journals, research on narcissism has made its way into the mass media and our daily life.The New York Times noted that narcissism is a favored topic and that people everywhere are diagnosing others with it.

The fear that a strength­based approach will cause narcissism also occurs because of our binary (非此即彼的) thinking. We mistakenly believe that one cannot be both confident and humble. Without confidence in their strengths, Gandhi and Mother Teresa couldn’t have achieved so much, and yet modesty and selflessness are their qualities.

When we assume that strength­focus is the same as self­focus, we fail to make the idea clear that people who know their strengths are, actually, more likely to be pro­social and ready to help others.

It’s easy to conclude that every young person is at risk of becoming a narcissist but I’d like to stand up for the thousands of young kids I have worked with who are caring, thoughtful and humble—even when they use their strengths.

9 . Nowadays, the world is slowly becoming a high-tech society and we are now surrounded by technology. Facebook and Twitter are innovative tools; text messaging is still a somewhat existing phenomenon and even e-mail is only a flashing spot on the screen when compared with our long history of snail mail. Now we adopt these tools to the point of essentialness, and only rarely consider how we are more fundamentally affected by them.

Social media, texting and e-mail all make it much easier to communicate, gather and pass information. But they also present some dangers. By removing any real human engagement, they enable us to develop our abnormal self-love without the risk of disapproval or criticism theatrical metaphor (隐喻), these new forms of communication provide a stage on which we create our own characters, hidden behind a fourth wall of tweets, status updates and texts. This unreal state of unconcern can become addictive as we separate ourselves a safe distance from the cruelty of our fleshly lives, where we are imperfect, powerless and insignificant. In essence, we have been provided not only the means to be more free, but also to become new, to create and protect a more perfect self to the world. As we become more reliant on these tools, they become more a part of our daily routine and so we become more restricted in this fantasy.

So it is that we live in a cold era, where names and faces represent two different levels of closeness, where working relationships occur only through the magic of email and where love can start or end by text message. An environment such as this reduces interpersonal relationships to mere digital exchanges.

Would a celebrity have been so daring to do something dishonorable if he had had to do it in person? Doubtful. It seems he might have been lost in a fantasy world that ultimately convinced himself into believing the digital self could obey different rules and regulations, as if he could continually push the limits of what’s acceptable without facing the consequences of “real life.”