Within the depth-psychology corpus, ‘Ground’ operates across at least four distinct but interrelated registers. In somatic and trauma work—most explicitly in Ogden—it names the physiological act of connecting the body to the earth’s gravitational field, a process that confers stability, steadfastness, and the capacity to remain present. Welwood raises the term to a metaphysical plane, distinguishing stratified ‘grounds’ of experience: the transpersonal ground of felt oneness, the still deeper ‘open ground’ of primordial awareness anterior to subject-object division, and the contextual ground of felt meaning from which focal attention differentiates objects. Giegerich, in pointed critique, scrutinizes imaginal psychology’s claim to a ‘middle ground’ as an evasion—a logical no-man’s land that permits the discipline to avoid both rigorous metaphysics and pure empiricism. McGilchrist deploys the figure-ground distinction as a neurological diagnostic: left-hemisphere processing foregrounds discrete objects at the expense of the encompassing ground that the right hemisphere retains. Berry, from an archetypal standpoint, treats psychic ground as prima materia—the maternal substrate into which experience must sink in order to become substantial. Taken together, these voices reveal ground as both the most concrete and the most contested term in the corpus: a threshold concept linking body, psyche, epistemology, and ontology.