The article is devoted to the analysis of a number of methodological problems of the study of the social mechanism of continuity in the development of spiritual culture. The aim of the work is to present cultural continuity as a set of interconnected information processes. Spiritual culture is considered as a subsystem of culture, its content is defined as a historically specific variant of the formational type of spiritual production. Continuity exists as an aspect of genetic connection, it is established between spiritual cultures that replace each other within a separate social organism. Cultural continuity is the reproduction of the content of the past spiritual culture in the subsequent system and its change. Cultural continuity exists only as part of a revolutionary process (intercultural transition), which has the social character of a formational shift and/or a political shift, a change in the political system, if this change can be considered as a cultural transformation that demonstrates profound changes in the political worldview and political state. In the composition of culture, it is necessary to distinguish: a) the ideological core formed by values specific to the new qualitative state of culture; b) axiologically neutral periphery, including the infrastructure of spiritual production, scientific and technical knowledge. The latter is the priority object of succession, because it is transferred to the new culture with minimal change and distortion. The continuity is always a communication. Initially it has the character of interaction of subjects of living spiritual activity and then — unilateral influence of the objectified activity (the text, which is the cultural patrimony) on their followers. The live activity begins and completes the act of communication. The conservative moment of morality is acts of understanding. Understanding is a stable reproduction of the content of the message (cultural text). As the new culture strengthens and the old one is deinstitutionalized, the unity of living and objectified activity in communication is destroyed, which calls into question the authenticity of understanding
