Abstract-universal and concrete-universal in the concept of “tool of labor” and the method of production of spiritual culture

The article analyses E.V. Ilyenkov's interpretation of B. Franklin's definition of man as "a toolmaking animal". It is stated that B. Spinoza's position known to E.V. Ilyenkov about perfection not only of "natural tools" but also of "mental tools" is not used by E.V. Ilyenkov to define man. The insufficiency of the concept "instrument of labour" for the definition of man is proved. The necessity of K. Marx's introduction of the concept of "means of labour" is substantiated. The abstract universal and concrete universal in the concept of "means of labour" is revealed. The conclusion is made about the works of artistic and scientific creativity, the space of spiritual culture as means of labour used for the transformation of man. The definition of man as a creature producing means of labour and transforming nature and himself with the help of means of labour is proposed. In this case, the means of labour is understood as a unity of the abstract universal (as exchange value) and concrete universal (as use value).