Suchergebnisse

Trumpai apžvelgus UNESCO apibrėžtas skirtingas paveldo tipologijas, dėmesys skiriamas įvairioms kul- tūros vertybėms, kurios, nors ir nepriskiriamos "pagrindinėms" paveldo kategorijoms, simbolizuoja reikšmingą paveldo turtą, siūlantį, be savo įprastos paskirties, daugybę galimybių, kaip jį būtų galima pritaikyti "netradi- cinėms" pridėtinę vertę kuriančioms paslaugoms. Įžanginiame skyriuje pateikiami pavyzdžiai, iliustruojantys netradicinį kultūros paveldą: istorinis maršrutas "Rytų ekspresas", mėlynasis tramvajus Tramvia Blau ar funi- kulierius Tibidabo Funicular Barselonoje; parkai, sodai ir žaliosios erdvės kaip išskirtinių renginių vietos; ypa- tingos ar nykstančios augalijos ir gyvūnijos buveinės; istoriniai piligrimų keliai Via Francigena, El Camino de Santiago de Compostela ir Camí de Cel de Barcelona; Italijos asociacijos Italian Alpine Club (CAI) organizuo- jami Dolomitų kelias ir kalnų žygiai; kruizai, istoriškai reikšmingi komerciniai ir kariniai maršrutai, pavyzdžiui, Viduržemio jūros ir Baltijos jūros turai, maršrutai į Indiją; tradiciniai šou, koncertai, operos, muzikos / šokių renginiai ir ritualai; sausumos ir jūros augalija bei gyvūnija, kuriai gresia išnykimo pavojus; pajūrio ir pakrančių paveldas, pavyzdžiui, švyturiai, istoriniai uostai ir pan. Daugelyje Europos šalių "kultūros paveldui" gali būti priskiriami ir artefaktai, žmonių atrasti daugiau nei prieš 50 metų. Taigi į paveldo apsaugą gali pretenduoti daug įvairių objektų – nuo pirmojo bakelitinio radijo imtuvo ir pokarinių automobilių iki elektroninės kompiuterių įrangos ir dizaino kūrinių. Jeigu etno- gra nės kolekcijos, daug kartų žiūrėtos kino juostos ir TV įrašai taip pat vertinami kaip papildomi elemen- tai (saugomi jau beveik 60 metų), tuomet visa tai sudaro nepakeičiamą ir saugotiną informacijos "šaltinį", kurį dera perduoti ateinančioms kartoms. Be materialiojo paveldo, derėtų saugoti ir nematerialųjį paveldą, pavyzdžiui, muziką, šokius, ritualus, pasakas ir pan., taip pat naujausią, bet ne mažiau svarbų "ateities" pa- veldą. Apsidairius aplink XXI a. ateities muziejus kuratoriaus akimis, gali iškilti pagrįstas klausimas: "Ar ateities kartos, net ir artimos ateities kartos, sugebės suprasti dabartinės kartos kuriamą turinį?" Trumpai panagrinėjus milžiniškus ir įvairialypius paveldo klodus galima užduoti vieną svarbiausių klausimų: "Kaip užtikrinti tinkamą paveldo naudojimą, valorizaciją ir valdymą?" Nepakanka vien tik vadovautis esamu scenarijumi. Būtina pasirengti susitikti su ateities paveldu, galinčiu tapti tikru iššūkiu būsimiems kolekcio- nieriams ar kuratoriams. Paveldas turi daugybę funkcijų ir daugybę vertybių, tad verta gerai ištyrinėti šiuos daugiamačius ir turtingus klodus, kad būtų galima pasinaudoti visais jų teikiamais privalumais. Šiai už- duočiai veiksmingai ir kokybiškai atlikti yra būtina metodologija. "Verčių" požiūrio taikymas analizuojant paveldą galėtų prisidėti sprendžiant problemas ir užtikrintai pagrįsti paveldo išsaugojimo, apsaugos ir val- dymo strategijos apibrėžimą. Šis straipsnis supažindina su logišku požiūriu, nustatant ir grupuojant platų paveldui priskiriamų vertybių spektrą. Nuodugniai išanalizavus vertybes (pradedant nuo akivaizdžiausių), nustatomos naujos vertybės, kurios yra (tiesiogiai) susijusios su inovacijomis ir technologijomis. Vertybių, kurias galima priskirti kultūros paveldui, kiekis didėja, daugėjant suinteresuotųjų šalių, kurios laikomos paveldo naudojimo, konservavimo ir valdymo proceso dalyvėmis. Priimant su paveldu susijusius spren- dimus ir reaguojant į skirtingų suinteresuotųjų šalių poreikius, šių vertybių apibrėžimas yra lemiamas iš esmės dėl to, kad šios vertybės padeda nustatyti konkrečios teritorijos patrauklumo lygį. Kultūros paveldo samprata remiasi įvairialype paklausa, kurią būtina atpažinti visose sudėtinėse kultūros paveldo dalyse, norint nuodugniai ištyrinėti vertybių klodus, kuriuos (kaip bus pristatoma toliau) riboja skirtingi diferen- cijuotos paklausos poreikiai. Norint pasiekti šį tikslą reikia apibrėžti įrankius bei metodus, padėsiančius nustatyti ir vertinti kultūros paveldą atsižvelgiant į skirtingas jam priskiriamų vertybių perspektyvas. Kie- kviena konkreti vertybė išsamiai aprašoma, kad būtų lengviau atlikti atskiro atvejo analizę. Nepaisant visų nukrypimų, plačiąja prasme aiškinama Europos kultūros paveldo idėja perteikia šias vertybes: istorines, atminties, pilietybės, civilizacijos, pripažinimo, tradicijų, meno, mokslo, konservavimo ir technologines. Suvokti vertybių ir kitų skirtingų dalių esmę yra įmanoma pripažįstant ir veiksmingai naudojant mūsų palikimą, vertinant jį kaip sistemą sąveikų tarp įvairių aspektų: paveldo tipologijos (gamtinės, kultūrinės, . nematerialios, . ateities); daugybės "verčių" (ekonominių, investicijų grąžos, socialinių, kultūrinių, išskirtinumo / unikalu- mo ir pan.); geogra nių ypatumų (vertingumo vietinių požiūriu, nacionalinių, regioninių, globalinių, daugiau- sia nevietinių ir pan.); potencialių naudotojų / galutinių naudotojų (ekspertų, specialistų, kolekcionierių, verslininkų, miesto gyventojų, tyrėjų, bendruomenės narių ir pan.). Didžioji dalis šių vertybių yra "potencialios"; kartais nėra galimybių ar poreikio nustatyti jų piniginę išraišką. Daugeliu atvejų išlaidas dengiantis subjektas nėra tas, kuris daug uždirba iš kultūros paveldo "naudojimo", čia susiduriama su savotišku asimetrinės rinkos modeliu. Visuomenės reikmėms skirto kul- tūros paveldo atveju "verčių" "rezultatais" dalijasi skirtingi vertybių grandinės dalyviai, o kultūros paveldą prižiūrinti valstybinė institucija tarp jų būna ne visada. Kartais visas vertybių spektras neatrodo akivaizdus (bent jau) vadovams arba nemanoma, kad būtų tinkama ar "išmintinga" šiomis vertybėmis pasinaudoti. Tokių vertybių naudojimas nebūtinai turi kelti pavojų mūsų paveldui – kultūros vertybės nesivaržo tar- pusavyje, išmintingai jas naudojant, jos nebus "suvartotos". Netgi priešingai, aiškiai apibrėžus vertybių "vertę", jas būtų lengviau atpažinti ir apsaugoti, suformuluojant bazines sąlygas jų tinkamam naudojimui užtikrinti. Toks scenarijus atrodo kaip visiems naudingas susitarimas: miesto gyventojai gali pasinaudoti visais efektyvaus paveldo naudojimo teikiamais privalumais, o suinteresuotosios šalys – džiaugtis didesniu matomu ir išaugusiomis pajamomis. Sėkmingai įdiegtoje sistemoje būtų numatytas struktūrinis vertinimo procesas, atsižvelgiantis ir į speci nes vertinimo procedūras bei rodiklius, ir į ekspertus, prisidedančius prie šios blokinės schemos kūrimo. Daugeliu atvejų šios vertybės iliustruoja, kaip įgyvendinami lankytojų ir naudotojų lūkesčiai. Raktiniai žodžiai: kultūros paveldas, ateities paveldas, išmanusis paveldas, netradicinės kultūros vertybės, paveldo vertinimas, paveldo valdymas. ; Starting from a quick overview of the di erent typologies of heritage as de ned by UNESCO, the focus is made on a wide range of cultural assets that, even not classi ed the 'main' heritage families, represent, however, a relevant heritage asset that apart from the typical use o ers great opportunities to be suitable for 'unconventional' added value services. The introduction provides a selection of examples concerning unconventional cultural assets such as the historical trans- portation means Orient Express, Tramvia Blau or the Tibidabo Funicular in Barcelona; parks, gardens and green areas as scenarios of particular events or peculiar or extinct habitats of ora and fauna; historic itineraries such as via Francigena, El Camino de Santiago de Compostela and the Camí de Cel de Barcelona; the Dolomites and mountain hiking trails of the Italian Alpine Club (CAI); cruises, commercial and military routes important in history such as Mediterranean and Baltic routes, routes to India; traditional shows, concerts, opera, music/dances and rituals; land and marine ora and fauna considered to be at risk of extinction; maritime-coastal heritage such as lighthouses, historical harbours, etc. In many European countries, artefacts realised by human beings more than fty years ago are also considered potential 'Cultural Heritage'. Therefore, a variety of objects might be enlis- ted for protection such as the rst bakelite radio-set, post-war period cars, the early electronic computer equipment and design products. Furthermore, if ethnographic collections, many times movies and TV recordings are considered the complement pictures (that have already been pro- tected for almost sixty years), all of them constitute an irreplaceable 'source' of information to be protected and handed down to posterity. In addition to the tangible heritage, the intangible heritage such as music, dances, rituals, tales, etc. and last but not least the 'future' heritage should be preserved. If we look around in the shoes of a curator of a future museum of the 21st c., it is reasonable to ask ourselves 'Will future generations, even those of the near future, be able to access the content produced by this generation?' Having brie y explored the vast and heteroge- neous universe of heritage, one of the key questions posed to ourselves is 'How can we ensure a proper use, valorisation and management of it?' Along with the current scenario, we should be ready to deal with the future heritage that may represent a real challenge for future collectors or curators. As the heritage represents a multi-function and multi-value domain, there is a need to explore this multidimensional space in order to fully bene t from its richness. Thus, a metho- 129 130 dology enabling to complete the task in an e cient and productive way is required. Application of the 'value' approach in analysing heritage may contribute to solving the problem and provide a valid support in de ning a strategy to preserve, promote and manage it. The present paper outlines the logical approach for identi cation and clustering of the broad range of the values associated with the heritage. The in-depth analysis of values, starting from the more evident ones, leads to identi cation of a set of new values due to or directly connected with innovation and technologies. The plurality of values that can be associated with a cultural asset widens with the variety of stakeholders considered to participate in the process of heritage use, conservation and management. Establishing the values upon making decisions about the heritage and there- fore meeting the needs of di erent stakeholders is crucial, mainly due to the reason that such values contribute to identi cation of the degree of attractiveness of a given territory. The cultural heritage should be considered a system based on the heterogeneous demand to be recognised in its many components in order to investigate the value space throughout its extension that, as it will be outlined later, is delimited by di erent needs of the di erentiated demand; in order to do this, we need to identify and de ne tools and methods of measuring and evaluating the cultural heritage in the di erent perspectives of the value attributable to it. Each speci c value is outlined in detail to facilitate the implementation of the approach to a single case study. The concept of the European cultural heritage, interpreted in the broad sense and with all its declinations, is the bearer of a multitude of values: historical value, testimony, citizenship, civilization, recognition, traditions, artistic, scienti c, conservation and technology. The matter of values and the other di erent elements actively contributing to the overall appreciation and fruitful exploitation of our legacy might be considered a complex of interactions among the following di erent aspects: • Heritage typology (natural, cultural,. intangible,. future) • Wide set of 'values' (economic value, return of investment, social, cultural, exceptionality/uniquely, etc.) • Geographic range (valuable for locals, national, regional, global, non-local mainly, etc.) • Potential users/end users (experts, specialists, collectors, businessmen, citizens, researchers, community members, etc.) Major parts of these values are 'potential'; sometimes there is no chance or need to monetize them. It happens frequently that the one who covers the expenses is not the one who earns much money from the 'use' of the cultural asset, i.e. a kind of asymmetric market model is observed. In case of public cul- tural assets, the 'e ects' of the 'values' are shared among di erent actors in the value-chain, sometimes not including the public body looking after the cultural assets at all. Moreover, sometimes the full set of values is not evident at least to the managers or it is not considered proper or 'wise' to take advantage of them. The exploitation of such values will not necessarily jeopardize our heritage, cultural assets are not rivalling and a wise exploitation will not 'consume' them. On the contrary, a clear identi cation of their 'values' will help to identify and protect them developing the basic conditions to ensure a proper exploitation. Such a scenario looks like a win-win agreement: citizens may bene t from the fruitful exploitation of their own heritage, whereas stakeholders may bene t from enhanced visibility and inco- mes. The full implementation of the system foresees a structured evaluation process taking into account both speci c evaluation procedures, metrics and a network of experts providing their contribution in a kind of block chain architecture. In most cases, these values represent the ful lment of the present expectations of visitors and users. Keywords: Cultural heritage, future heritage, smart heritage, unconventional cultural assets, heritage valorisation, heritage management.

The ideas of freedom, equality and justice have become the increased focus of philosophy discourse as well as the tools of political activities. They particularly stand out in the doctrine of neoliberalism, which advocates a reign of freedom. However, it has to be admitted that the concept of freedom which is ascribed to the highest values of contemporary social and political discourses is not mentioned in classical or modern axiological theories. This leads to the question whether freedom is a value indeed. In an attempt to discuss this question, the article briefly addresses different treatments of freedom concepts and further elaborates on "the paradox of freedom". Also, it is noteworthy that values are concurrent with human needs though the need of freedom is neither paramount nor fundamental. It is concluded that the contemporary exaltation of freedom and its attribution to the highest values raise a serious question why freedom as a value is not mentioned in classical and modern axiological theories, which induces us to turn back to the concept of freedom and its ontological status once more. This leads to more extensive research.

The ideas of freedom, equality and justice have become the increased focus of philosophy discourse as well as the tools of political activities. They particularly stand out in the doctrine of neoliberalism, which advocates a reign of freedom. However, it has to be admitted that the concept of freedom which is ascribed to the highest values of contemporary social and political discourses is not mentioned in classical or modern axiological theories. This leads to the question whether freedom is a value indeed. In an attempt to discuss this question, the article briefly addresses different treatments of freedom concepts and further elaborates on "the paradox of freedom". Also, it is noteworthy that values are concurrent with human needs though the need of freedom is neither paramount nor fundamental. It is concluded that the contemporary exaltation of freedom and its attribution to the highest values raise a serious question why freedom as a value is not mentioned in classical and modern axiological theories, which induces us to turn back to the concept of freedom and its ontological status once more. This leads to more extensive research.

The article analyzes perspectives for democracy in the Islamic socio-cultural and political region. In Islamic world the democratization project meets strong Islamism opposition, which uses Islamic rhetoric and tries to convince the world community that democracy does not conform to the norms of Islam. It has been claimed that by virtue democracy and Islam are just incompatible, implying that fundamental values and principles protected by constitutional democracy are impossible in Islamic nations. However, the conducted analysis proves otherwise. Islam and democracy are not adversaries. On the contrary, they are united by the same fundamental values and principles, which are cherished by Islam and protected by constitutional democracy. Islamic nations have everything in order to build democracy and go toward the rule of law state. Yet it will require extremely radical actions – re-interpretation of contemporary concept of justice as well as the entire Shari'ah reverting to justice as a virtue. And only in this way it will become possible by the idea walk toward God.

The article analyzes perspectives for democracy in the Islamic socio-cultural and political region. In Islamic world the democratization project meets strong Islamism opposition, which uses Islamic rhetoric and tries to convince the world community that democracy does not conform to the norms of Islam. It has been claimed that by virtue democracy and Islam are just incompatible, implying that fundamental values and principles protected by constitutional democracy are impossible in Islamic nations. However, the conducted analysis proves otherwise. Islam and democracy are not adversaries. On the contrary, they are united by the same fundamental values and principles, which are cherished by Islam and protected by constitutional democracy. Islamic nations have everything in order to build democracy and go toward the rule of law state. Yet it will require extremely radical actions – re-interpretation of contemporary concept of justice as well as the entire Shari'ah reverting to justice as a virtue. And only in this way it will become possible by the idea walk toward God.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

Although the value system has been discussed since the antiquity, the list of underlying values has not been available yet. Socrates elaborated on virtue, courage and justice, Plato was concerned about truth, goodness, wisdom, determination and temperance. Aristotle analysed ethical norms. Thomas Aquinas considered values to be perfection, which exists as absolute good. He distinguished prudence, justice, volitional morality, faith, hope and love. Jeanas-Jacquesas Rousseau tended to exalt ideas of liberty, equality, fraternity, and humanism and considered happiness, reason, sympathy to be underlying values, encouraged development of volition, independence and pro-activeness. The most relevant values for Immanuel Kant included reason, liberty, self-respect, honour, duty, autonomy, volition and goodness. The philosophers of the 20th century, for example, Max Scheler, made attempts to classify values. The Italian philosopher Battista Mondina stated that values can be of different levels (from the perspective of values not all the things and behaviour patterns are equal: some of them possess more value, whereas the others – less) and comprise a certain hierarchy. He presents a more detailed classification of values, which better complies with life and attitudes of an individual in the 20th century. In the end of the 20th century the researchers got an idea of creating a hierarchy of values relevant to a separate nation. The description of the project "Polish Axiological Dictionary", which distinguishes the values of importance to the Polish, can be considered an example. It is obvious that a unified conception of values did not exist: different authors treated values in a different way. The concept value is used in various meanings: as an aspect of world value, as attractive objects, life quality, valuable things or phenomena, behaviour norms which influence decisions. Values reflect what is most valuable for an individual from cultural, psychological, sociological, moral and esthetical perspectives. An individual is governed and guided by values; he/she lives for them. The values make up the core of every culture. However, the issue of values raises many questions. Firstly, does a canon of universal values exist? In fact, such values as motherland, patriotism, democracy and tolerance are important but are they equally important? Such daily life values as – work, career, and money – are conceptualised. The question arises if this has always and everywhere been like this? Are such values as family, marriage, child still relevant these days? Most likely for Lithuanians these values will hardly differ from common European or common human values but it is still interesting what is typical only of Lithuanians, what did they include into their value system adopting experience of neighbouring countries and what presupposed the meaning of words. Working on the book "Values in the Worldview of Lithuanians" an idea came to mind that following the concept analysis, attempts can be made to classify Lithuanian values. Various classification principles can be applied: Societal values: state, nation, motherland, language, freedom, land, work, commitment, justice, duty, honour, morality, the good, the beautiful, morals, etc. • Personal values: happiness, family, home, personal liberty, health, loves, etc. They can also be related to the individual's growth: • Values that build up the personality: home, family, nature, faith, work, morals, love – that is, everything, what a person gets in the family. • Values that improve the personality: state, nation, language, freedom, patriotism, empathy, tolerance, wisdom, etc. – that is, everything, what a person gets at school and in his/her further life. However, strict boundaries do not exist and cannot exist because a person functions as a member of society as well as a separate individual.