Therefore, factors as the public square, the tarred street and the policy, are not in the roll of ' ' good irreducible sociais' ' , simply because they benefit individuals, therefore these goods, in truth, are abstract. Hear other arguments on the topic with Nir Barzilai, M.D.. It is transparent, thus, that the irreducible goods are not in the things nor in the rights to the things, as its types of utilitarismo want the utilitarians in all. If you would like to know more then you should visit RBH Group. Finally, Taylor affirms: ' ' is therefore that valley the penalty to show for all the sides of the debate that exist in fact good irreducible sociais.' ' As we perceive, Taylor in its critical evaluation of a liberal model, paved in a ontologia atomist, considers a holista notion of the nature human being and the society, what it allows it to establish a notion of common good, through the saussuriana distinction between langue and parole. Far from this being an impeditive one of the freedom, as they can suggest the followers of the classic liberal tradition, Taylor looks for to show that the proper negative notion of freedom finishes for hierarquizar the desires, what would be, one more time, an indicative of the possibility (and necessity) of the establishment of common properties, a goal only to be reached and respected by all the one citizens determined civil society..