Some time ago, I took my daughter back to my hometown in the countryside. Due to the construction of the main road on the return road, I need to bypass a rural path. I've never walked this country road, so I asked all the way. Fortunately, at every intersection, the people asked answered with great enthusiasm. Some people even feared that we were going wrong and wanted to take us to the next key intersection to point out the direction. My daughter was carsick and stopped by the roadside to have a rest. Strangers in the roadside yard turned back into the house and took out a big pomegranate for their daughter. "If you eat a pomegranate, you won't get carsick!" this trip moved her very much. All the way, they praised the people here "too warm, too good!" The people in my hometown are simple and friendly to guests. Even if I meet strangers, I am willing to treat each other warmly and sincerely as long as it doesn't look like a "bad person". On the one hand, it is the kindness in the bones. On the other hand, it is also the maintenance of the image of my hometown. I hope people who have been to my hometown will say good things about my hometown. This attitude towards strangers belongs to local social etiquette. For a "country of etiquette" like China, most places have such folk traditions and etiquette awareness. The enthusiasm and care for outsiders are common in traditional etiquette, and we all regard it as a virtue. Of course, this etiquette is also reflected in the treatment of foreign friends: in the social or public sphere, foreign friends are generally given special care, such as special queuing windows, higher standard reception, more efficient official handling... In recent years, some individual cases have been concerned and evaluated by netizens, and there are also some criticisms, but generally speaking, these "preferential treatment" Still in the category of "etiquette", it is too much to say that worshiping foreign countries and fawning on foreign countries. Foreign friends coming to China are similar to guests at home. As long as they are normal visitors, their social status is naturally higher than that of ordinary family members. Moreover, these guests, whether traveling or business, have language barriers, cultural differences and life differences in China. They provide them with a little special convenience and have nothing to criticize. However, such special convenience or treatment shall not directly harm the interests of family members, nor shall it violate normal social etiquette. For example, my daughter is carsick. She can't go into other people's houses without telling. She can take pomegranates and eat them at will. This is not only a moral problem of rudeness and impoliteness, but also involves the order of rules and law. The recent incident of security guards asking passengers to "give up their seats" for foreign friends in Shenzhen Metro reflects, to a certain extent, the conflict between "etiquette" and "rules" in treating guests, as well as the scale of "etiquette". Interestingly, the security guard also mentioned "traditional etiquette" and "hospitality" when asking passengers to give up their seats. At first glance, there seems to be no problem: when guests come home, it's impossible for them to stand and sit by ourselves, right? Give up your seat for the guests. What can I say? From the perspective of security, it may be so "simple". But in this matter, it is really not as simple as "etiquette" and "hospitality". As a public space, subway seats are scarce resources and belong to one of the core interests of passengers. If there are no special circumstances, such as "people in need", it is undoubtedly a "rude" requirement to ask passengers to give up their interests and give up their seats to people who have nothing to do with themselves. Of course, the "host" has the right to refuse the rude request of the "guest". Moreover, this request is not the communication request between the "guest" and himself, but the request made by the manager as an "outsider" according to his self righteous judgment. The subway is a regular space, which reflects the rules everywhere, which is the premise of the normal operation of the subway. In the rule space, it is unreasonable to put forward higher requirements to passengers than the rules. For the moral problem of giving up a seat, which can not be accurately identified, it can not be judged directly with the eyes of the manager. Managers may be able to determine who is the "person in need" with their own eyes, but they are likely to make mistakes if they want to determine who is the "person not in need". For example, the passenger who was asked to give up his seat was himself a person who had just been discharged from the hospital for two weeks, but was mistaken by the security guard as "the person who should give up his seat". In the rule space, let the rules run by themselves. Such an order is not necessarily perfect, but it must be the most appropriate and with the lowest probability of error. The reason why we only advocate rather than enforce seat surrender is that morality cannot be enforced. Whether there is a "need" can only be decided by the passenger's personal judgment and comparison with other "people in need". With a simple "hospitality" approach, the security guard asked domestic passengers to give up their seats for foreigners. The initial intention was not necessarily wrong, nor was it possible to worship foreign countries, but the method must be wrong - it is against the rules to ask them to give up their seats, and the standard must be too high - they treated foreigners with excessive courtesy. This is probably a deviation in the understanding of "traditional etiquette" and "hospitality". (Xinhua News Agency)