Paranoia occupies a contested and generative position across the depth-psychology corpus, appearing variously as a clinical syndrome, a neurobiological phenomenon, a psychodynamic formation, and a civilisational pathology. McGilchrist situates paranoia firmly within neurological asymmetry, arguing that right hemisphere dysfunction produces paranoid psychosis as a primary feature of disorders such as schizophrenia, distinguishing it from the grandiosity associated with left hemisphere overdrive. Jung and his analytic inheritors approached paranoia as a psychogenically rooted encapsulation of traumatically derived material, emphasising the collapse of emotionally sustaining fantasy systems. Abraham and Rank contributed psychoanalytic readings in which the persecutor in paranoid delusion is traceable to unconscious object-representations, notably primal anal-sadistic fixations and the heroic family romance. Hillman extended these clinical observations toward a philosophical register, identifying a structural paranoia inherent in Western statecraft and worldview — a diagnosis of collective psychic life rather than individual pathology. Trungpa illuminated paranoia through the Buddhist lens of the wind-karma nexus, framing it as one-directional perception that dissolves when its energetic substrate is liberated. Thomas Moore offered an etymological reclamation, reading paranoia as ‘knowledge alongside’ the dominant frame — knowledge excluded from the sanctioned centre. Together these voices reveal paranoia as a site where brain, trauma, culture, and cosmos intersect, making it one of depth psychology’s most epistemologically charged clinical concepts.