This article compares Edgar Morin’s complex thought with Carlos Federico Obregón Díaz’s Philosophy of Belonging. It argues that Morin’s dialogical, recursive, and hologrammatic principles can be reconstructed within the four ontological principles of belonging: all existence is organized existence; reality is stratified; organization is simultaneously synchronic and diachronic; and every belonging is imperfect. The comparison reveals an asymmetrical relation. Morin’s principles primarily provide epistemological and methodological guidance for understanding complexity. Within the Philosophy of Belonging, however, the corresponding relations become constitutive characteristics of existence itself. The dialogical principle is expressed through the inseparability of synchrony and diachrony and through the relation between belonging and autonomy. Recursion becomes the mutual constitution of organizations and their components, while the hologrammatic principle becomes the ontological interdependence of parts and wholes. The article argues that the Philosophy of Belonging can account for the appropriateness of Morin’s epistemology, whereas Morin’s principles do not independently entail the proposition “Being is Belonging,” the stratification of reality, dual temporality, or imperfect belonging. It concludes by evaluating the strengths and limitations of both frameworks.