Within the depth-psychology and allied philosophical corpus, ‘luck’ is not treated as mere random chance but as a concept of considerable hermeneutic density. The tradition divides broadly into two orientations. The first, represented most programmatically by Nussbaum’s examination of Greek tragedy and Aristotle, frames luck as the irreducible contingency that impinges upon eudaimonia — the uncontrolled incursions of fortune that both threaten and, paradoxically, constitute the texture of a genuinely human life. Luck here is the antagonist of practical reason (nous), yet it is also the condition under which virtue proves itself. The second orientation, visible in Cunningham’s astrological psychology and Hillman’s archetypal reading of kairos and Tyche, treats luck as partially transparent to inner psychological realities: what popular discourse names ‘luck’ dissolves, upon analysis, into foresight, wisdom, philosophical attitude, and the dynamics of self-fulfilling belief. Hillman’s engagement with Hermes and Tyche introduces a third register, in which luck belongs to the domain of the gods — an eruption of the uncontrollable into human intention, aligned with the chaotic residue that persists in any ordered cosmos. Sri Aurobindo complicates this further by locating ‘fortune’ within the logic of karma, resisting simplistic moral equivalences. Across the corpus the central tension is between luck as the natural enemy of rational self-sufficiency and luck as a necessary, even revelatory, dimension of the good human life.