The best way to phrase this is "all other conditions being equal, does it have value"?
In the case of learning before, we looked at various conditions that decide if it has value in this instance. In the case of unconditioned, we assume all these conditions are equal - no greater or lesser value either way. We remove these from affecting learning by assuming them to be equal, balance out, not affect the equation either way.
Then we ask: Does learning have value? Or: is kindness better than cruelty - all other conditions being equal.
If our answer is yes, we are saying it is an unconditioned, or absolute, or objective, value. Whether these exist, can be known, etc... this is helpful to more quickly identify and define what it is we're talking about.
Regarding "unconditional value." Let me state that you can't even speak of value without a condition. Under certain conditions, learning can be of a value, but not under all.
Value makes sense only if it reflects a condition, and that makes it a relative, not absolute quality. Without someone to learn, learning becomes an oxymoron, ceases to exist. If the conditions for learning do not exist, neither does learning.
Then we ask: Does learning have value? Or: is kindness better than cruelty - all other conditions being equal
Even your question is relative. The concept of better or worse is a relative concept. I think they are meaningless questions, if they are to be answered in an absolute, conditionless sense.
If our answer is yes, we are saying it is an unconditioned, or absolute, or objective, value
I am sorry, why is an absolute value (if there were such a thing) "objective?" There is nothing objective about a value; rather I would say a value is always subjective. "One man's trash is another man's treasure" the old adage says.
Are you desperately looking for a rational way to justify or find God outside of traditional Church? The biggest believers, those who would literally die for their faith, could not tell you what God is or how do they know their belief is 'objectively' true.
In mathematics you can create a concept A and a concept B. They are meaningless and valueless and purposeless at this stage. Once you define them and give them a value (+/- or +/+, or -/-), they become operant concepts and their relationship can be established under certain conditions (i.e. f(x) = BA).
Only then, depending on the purpose of the relationship under investigation (the set goal), can we speak of one being better or worse in a relatively 'meaningful' way. But by then we are way past anything absolute.