If excellence is your aim, such details--and they are countless in education--must be addressed in a thoughtful, systemic way.

This resource is very helpful in explaining, in simple and short word paragraphs (short and sweet, it is), the full context of the commons:

"The commons is not a resource. It is a resource plus a defined community and the protocols, values and norms devised by the community to manage its resources. Many resources urgently need to be managed as commons, such as the atmosphere, oceans, genetic knowledge and biodiversity."

Emphasizing the social norms and community accountability aspects of the commons are key to truly understanding the commons, it's role in society, and how it can be sustained. 

This is what we mean with the term 'sociological imagination'. Theory allows us to 'see' below the surface of society and to understand the invisible network of norms, values, structures, institutions and systems of inequality that shape individual choice and behavior. In this way, SNA should be fundamental to sociological methods.

This is fundamental to sociology as a discipline. We call it peer pressure, social support, social capital, norms, etc. This is why many who use SNA see it as the best methodology for doing sociology.

To what extent do the earliest introductions to norms play into these "rudiments of taste"?

A very crucial point here: judgment and discernment are themselves relational and contextual.

That said, we would be wise to keep in mind the Lemos piece on norms and normalcy (as it bears upon bodies) as we read the rest of this paragraph.

What Lemos might identify as norms?

Normal is a powerful, potent, and potentially pernicious black box. And it is frequently a black box deployed against rhetoric.

I want to highlight the useful understanding of norms as tools: this very quickly begins to unpack the black box that is normal. Lemos turns norms" into Morty's car battery*.

So if it threatens our understanding of what it means to be human.. is that beneficial to our ongoing research of essentially what makes us humans by constantly pushing our understanding to be deeper? or is harmful and uprooting of the interpersonal/cultural norms we've established?