Within the depth-psychology corpus, ‘organism’ functions as a pivotal concept bridging biology, phenomenology, and the philosophy of mind. The passages reveal a sustained tension between two poles: the organism as a mechanical system reducible to its parts, and the organism as a self-organizing, teleological whole whose identity exceeds any static analysis of its components. Damasio consistently employs the organism as the foundational reference point for consciousness, arguing that neural representations must be anchored in, and continuously narrate, the state of the living body — consciousness itself emerging as the organism’s means of knowing its own relational status with respect to the world. Thompson, drawing on Jonas and Merleau-Ponty, advances the dialectical organism-environment relation, whereby neither term is intelligible without the other, and metabolism itself constitutes an immanent purposiveness. McGilchrist mounts the most sustained ontological challenge, insisting that organisms are better understood as stabilised flows than as fixed structures, and that the organism-as-machine metaphor catastrophically misrepresents the plasticity, wholeness, and teleological self-regulation evident in biological phenomena. Simondon approaches the organism through the lens of individuation, treating it as a site where pre-individual potentials resolve into form through ongoing informational exchange. Together, these voices converge on the organism as a process, a perspective, and an irreducible locus of value — making it indispensable to any depth-psychological account of selfhood, consciousness, and felt life.