Blindness occupies a remarkably heterogeneous position across the depth-psychology corpus, functioning simultaneously as neurological fact, hysterical symptom, mythic condition, and metaphor for epistemological failure. The clinical tradition, from Janet’s meticulous dissection of hysterical blindness through Abraham’s psychoanalytic excavation of neurotic visual disturbances, treats blindness as a dissociative phenomenon in which the perceptual apparatus is compromised by unconscious conflict — scopophilia, castration anxiety, and the displacement of genital sensation upward into the eye. The neuroscientific wing of the corpus, represented by McGilchrist, Panksepp, Levine, and LeDoux, centers on blindsight — the paradox of a subject who navigates the visual world without conscious awareness — as evidence of the layered architecture of awareness itself, revealing how much cognition operates beneath the threshold of reportable experience. For Merleau-Ponty and Gallagher, congenital blindness provides an indispensable test case for theories of spatial perception and cross-modal integration, challenging empiricist assumptions inherited from Locke. The mythological register, primary for Hillman, treats blindness as the necessary cost of inner vision: Oedipus’s physical blinding enables Teiresian sight; analysis itself requires ‘putting out the eyes of the physical view.’ Jung, in the Red Book, figures the Blind and Immortal One as a power that moves without seeing. Hillman extends this to diagnose ‘soulless concreteness’ as civilization’s characteristic blindness. The term thus spans sensation, defense, myth, and cultural critique.