Ideologija kao nastojanje kojim se neki pojedinačni ili skupni interes, odnosno mišljenje, prikazuje općim, osnovno je sredstvo svake volje za vlast na putu njezina ostvarenja. No, da bi se nešto pojedinačno ili društveno djelomično moglo uspješno predstaviti kao opće, ono mora prikriti svoje naličje s kojim se ocrtava u cjelini i tako pokazuje što uistinu jest. A to znači ne opće, ne apsolutno, ne univerzalno, nego tek pojedinačno, relativno, parcijalno, ali s ambicijom da si podredi sve stoje od njega različito ili mu se čak suprotstavlja. Uspješnost kojom se neka neistina - djelomična istina ili poluistina - predstavlja kao Istina, zapravo je uspješnost kojom prikriva to što ona uistinu jest, dakle upravo neistina. Drugim riječima, snaga je neistine u njezinoj uvjerljivosti da se predstavi kao Istina. Pa kada istina neistine izbije na vidjelo ona postaje nemoćna. A istina je neistine upravo u onome što pokušava prikriti, u naličju onoga što pokazuje svijetu, u cjelini koju nastoji zatajiti.

U rascjepu između teorijskog i praktičkog uma, između razuma i volje, između spoznaja i htijenja, između znanja i vrijednosti, otvara se prostor manipulacije jednima i drugima. Odvojena od svoje vrijednosne osnove i vlastitih vrijednosnih implikacija znanja se doimaju sveopćima, jer tobože ne ovise ni o čijoj (ograničenoj) volji, kao što se i vrijednosti odvojene od svoje spoznajne osnove i spoznaja koje impliciraju doimaju univerzalnima, jer tobože ne ovise ni o čijem (ograničenom) znanju. Ali ta je odvojenost tek privid ograničenog uma koji kad može onda neće, a kad hoće onda ne može. Uma koji sebe ne prepoznaje u svojoj stvaralačkoj cjelovitosti, nego ili kao razum lišen htijenja, ili kao volju lišenu spoznaje, pa zna samo ono što mu je izvanjski određeno znati i hoće samo ono što mu je izvanjski određeno htjeti.

Utoliko je ova je knjiga rezultat mojih traganja za odgovorima na različita pitanja, ali uvijek s istom pretpostavkom daje to što spoznajem određeno mojim htijenjem, kao što je i moje htijenje određeno mojim spoznajama. Uostalom i taje pretpostavka rezultat mojih prethodnih spoznaja vođenih htijenjem da budem svoj, kao što je rezultat i mojih prethodnih htijenja vođenih spoznajom da to mogu biti.

Ono dakle od čega polazim jest to daje čovjek mjera svih stvari, kako onih koje jesu da jesu, tako i onih koje nisu da nisu, a istinito je pri tome cjelina koja se kao bit dovršava svojim razvitkom. No ako um nije isti u svih, a svatko ipak, ako nije »bog ili zvijer«, mora živjeti u nekoj zajednici, onda se bit razvija samo u međuigri ili sukobu različitih umova koji su se za određenu zajednicu odlučili ili su na nju prisiljeni. Hoće li taj razvitak teći u međuigri ili sukobu umova, više jednom ili drugom, u sukobu više ili manje snošljivom, ovisi o svakom pojedincu kao i zajednici u cjelini. No, ako je »čovjek čovjeku najveća potreba« kao što vjerujem da jest, onda svatko može biti slobodan samo u slobodnoj zajednici, kao stoje slobodna zajednica samo zajednica slobodnih pojedinaca. A to znači da iako za život u zajednici moramo imati istinu istu za sve, ona ne mora za sve biti i sva istina, jer osoba ma koliko pripadala zajednici, jednim dijelom uvijek pripada samo sebi.

Na osnovno pitanje ove knjige, o odnosu činjenica i vrijednosti, pokušao sam odgovoriti u pet poglavlja naslovljenih čestim i više-manje poznatim frazama koje smatram nepromišljenima i spornima.

U 1. poglavlju »Odgoj i obrazovanje!?« pitanje odnosa činjenica i vrijednosti otvara se već samim naslovom koji je višestruko sporan. Jer ne samo daje odgoj nerazložno reduciran na jedan svoj dio, iz kojega je isključeno obrazovanje, nego su odgoj i obrazovanje u toj sintagmi mišljeni kao dvije odvojene i unutarnje neovisne djelatnosti koje se onda, na ovaj ili onaj način, tek izvanjski spajaju eventualnom voljom pedagoga koji dozvoljavaju ili čak zahtijevaju njihovo povezivanje. Da to, međutim, nije smisleno, nego da su znanja i vrijednosti nerazdvojno povezani već u svojoj biti i da se međusobno impliciraju, pokušavam pokazati na odgojnom području na kojem se oni neposredno reproduciraju.

U 2. poglavlju »Povratak prirodi!?«, ostajući na području obrazovanja ali i s pomakom prema predmetu znanstvene spoznaje, pokušavam odnos znanja i vrijednosti oprimjeriti najednom posebnom dijelu obrazovanja pokazujući kako znanje tek svojom cjelovitošću otkriva svoju vrijednosnu dimenziju. Pa je obrazovanje istinsko samo toliko koliko je cjelovito i koliko omogućava da se razaberu njegove vrijednosne pretpostavke i implikacije. Pri čemu se povijesno i prirodno pokazuju kao vrijednosno i spoznajno neodvojivi.

U 3. poglavlju »Prava i prividna stvarnost!?« problematiziram način i sam predmet znanstvene spoznaje: stvarnost. Pa pokušavam pokazati da se stvarnost oblikuje - ili bolje stvarnosti oblikuju - u prepletanju spoznajne i vrijednosne dimenzije čovjekova odnosa prema njoj (njima).

U 4. poglavlju »Etika i demokracija!?« odnos činjenica i vrijednosti razmatram u kontekstu društvenih odnosa nastojeći pokazati kako se ideološke tvorbe i manipulacija ljudima grade upravo na odvajanju znanja od vrijednosti i prikrivanju njihovih uzajamnih veza.

Ideology, seen as an attempt to present some individual or group interest, i.e. thinking as general, is a basic means of any will to have power on the way of its own realisation. But if some-thing individual or social can be somewhat successfully presented as the general, it must hide its seamy side with which it is entirely outlined and shows what it really is. Not the general, not the absolute, not the universal, but merely the individual, the relative, the partial, with an ambition to subordinate anything that is different from itself or even opposed to itself. The success with which some untruth - part-truth or half-truth - is presented as the Truth is actually the success with which it hides its real identity, namely nothing but the untruth. In other words, the power of untruth lies in its own conviction to present itself as the Truth. So, when the truth of untruth comes to light, it becomes powerless. And the truth of untruth actually lies in what it is trying to hide, in the seamy side of what it is exposing to the world, in the entirety it is trying to keep to itself.

In the rift between theoretical and practical mind, between good sense and will, between notions and aspirations, between knowledge and values, the scope for manipulations is given to both sides. Separated from its value basis and its own value implications, knowledge makes an impression of being universal as it seemingly does not depend on anyone's (limited) will, just as the values that are separated from their cognitive basis and notions they imply seem to be universal as they seemingly do not depend on anyone's (limited) knowledge. However, this separation is just the illusion of a limited mind, which is not willing when it is capable, and incapable when it is willing. The mind that does not recognise itself in its creative entirety but either as a good sense deprived of aspirations or as a will deprived of cognition, so it knows only what it is externally supposed to know and wants only what it is externally determined to want.

This book has therefore resulted from my searching for the answers to various questions but always with the same supposition that what I conceive is determined by my aspirations, just as my aspirations are determined by my cognition. Moreover, this supposition has also resulted from my previous notions led by the aspiration to be myself, as well as it has resulted from my previous aspirations led by the cognition that I am capable of being myself.

So, the starting point is that man is a measure of ali things, the ones that are what they are as well as the ones that are not what they are not, and what is true is an entirety that is essentially finished with its development. If we do not ali have the same mind and anyone - not being 'the god or a beast' - has to live in a community, the essence is developed only in the interaction or conflict between different minds that have made decisions to live in a particular community or they have been forced to live in it. Whether the development will be realised in the interaction or in the conflict between minds, more in this or that way, in the conflict that is more or less tolerant, is dependant on any individual as well as on a community as an entirety. Yet,' if man needs man the most' as I do believe, then anyone can be free only in a free community, just as a free community is only a community of free individuals. And it means that, although we must have the same truth for anyone to live in a community, it should not be also all the truth for anyone, as any individual always partially belongs to herself/himself, no matter how much s/he belongs to a community.

I have tried to answer to the main question raised in this book, the relation between facts and values, in five chapters that are entitled with the frequent and more or less well-known phrases I consider thoughtless and disputable.

In Chapter 1 'Upbringing and Education!?', the question of interrelatedness between facts and values is raised by the title itself, which is controversial in many ways. Not only is upbringing groundlessly reduced to one of its aspects, excluding education, but upbringing and education in this phrase are considered as two separated and inner independent activities that are, this or that way, just externally connected due to the possible will of educators allowing or even requiring their connection. I am trying to demonstrate in the field in which the two of them are directly reproduced that this is not meaningful, while all sorts of knowledge and values are inseparably linked even in its essence, implying each other.

In Chapter 2 'Return to Nature!?', remaining in the field of upbringing but also shifting to the object of scientific understanding, I am trying to provide examples in order to illustrate the relation between knowledge and values in a special segment of education, showing that knowledge, only being coherent, reveals its value dimension. Education is therefore true as much as it is coherent and as much as it enables us to discover its value sup-positions and implications. In this matter, the historical and the natural are shown as being inseparable in terms of values and notions.

In Chapter 3 'True and Apparent Reality!?', I am paying my attention to the way and the object of scientific understanding, namely the reality, in order to explain that the reality is formed - or rather realities are formed - in the interweaving between cognitive and value dimensions of human relation to it (them).

In Chapter 4 'Ethics and Democracy!?', I am considering the relation between facts and values in the context of social relations, trying to show that ideological formations and manipulation over people are established just on separating knowledge from values and hiding their mutual relations.

And in Chapter 5 'Sex Equality!?', questioning the relations between the natural and the social, particularly in the strongly ideologised space of sexual relations, I am trying to point out that facts and values are mutually determined in the fight for maintaining or changing the reality.

Polić, Polić, Milan (2006.), Činjenice i vrijednosti, Zagreb: Hrvatsko filozofsko društvo