The thousand-year history of the philosophy has generally taken the shape of a process of growing systematization. The interest taken by the philosophers in the Unity, the Totality, the Absolute, in short, in the systemic approaches, was materialized in various theories in order to compensate and/or remedy “la fin des certitudes” » [the end of certitudes] /Prigojin/, “la crise des fondements” [the crises in the foundations] /Morin/, the failure, the downfall and/or incompleteness of the old visions. Thus, the systemic conceptualizations turned out to be accomplished, apotropaic forms of the philosophy and thinking. While emerging as truthful because it proposes, each systemic approach proves to be false because it excludes, by reflecting the World in its own mirror without realizing that it creates a different World. On the other hand, the systemic nature is what remains of a philosophy. In the field of sciences and philosophy, various paradigmatic, gnoseological and epistemological projects shape new synthetic-integrative modes of rationality, new rules and standards aimed at a complex and complete grasping of “l’interdépendance universelle” [the universal interdependence ] /Abelio/ of the structural, action-oriented and dynamic aspects. The philosophy of the trialectical antagonism of Stéphane Lupasco, his systemogenesis and cognitive dialectomethodology manages, in our opinion, to orchestrate a supra-model, a methodological algorithm, which is consistent with the unversalist systemic claims, emphasising the interdependence of the constituents as well as the dynamic and open mechanisms of knowledge. Such transfinite trialectical systemological understanding has been achieved in various (trans)disciplinary areas and still constitute the prolegomena for a new human knowledge at the time when, from now on, we should consider necessarily open and complex rational systems.