The term ‘icon’ traverses the depth-psychology corpus along several distinct but intersecting axes. In Orthodox theological contexts, recovered principally through Louth’s studies of Russian religious thinkers and Coniaris’s Philokalia commentary, the icon functions as a theological object of profound metaphysical weight — not illusion but revelation, not mimetic copy but theophanic presence. Florensky and Evdokimov, as Louth demonstrates, approach the icon as an epistemological alternative to Western rationalism: where linear perspective constructs an illusion of reality, the icon ‘is not trying to achieve an illusion of reality, but something else.’ In classical Greek religious thought, Vernant traces a structurally analogous function in the xoanon and kolossos — cult images that ‘present’ the invisible divine, oscillating between presence and absence, bound by ritual into animated power. Carson, reading Longus, identifies the ‘painted icon of Eros’ as the triangular object of desire that generates narrative longing. James’s cognitive psychology introduces the entirely distinct ‘iconic memory’ — a rapidly decaying sensory register. Place reads the tarot ‘Christ in Majesty’ as a standard Christian icon repurposed through Neoplatonic synthesis. These usages collectively reveal icon as a site where image, presence, reality, and the invisible intersect — psychologically, ritually, and aesthetically.