The term ‘particle’ occupies a contested and philosophically generative position across the depth-psychology corpus, functioning less as a settled physical category than as a pressure-point at which the boundaries between matter, mind, and field repeatedly break down. The most sustained treatments appear in McGilchrist, Simondon, Pauli, and von Franz, each approaching the concept from a different disciplinary vantage while converging on a shared conclusion: the particle, far from being the ultimate building block of reality, is a secondary, derivative, or perspectival phenomenon arising from continuous underlying fields. McGilchrist marshals quantum field theory to argue that ‘particles’ are ripples in fields, a thesis he recruits in service of his broader hemispheric argument against the left brain’s tendency to carve reality into bounded, discrete objects. Simondon, working from a philosophy of individuation, reconceives the particle not as a substance but as a modality of relation — its identity constituted by discontinuous quantum exchanges rather than by spatial location. Pauli engages the particle with full technical precision, exploring exclusion principles, particle-antiparticle conjugation, and the formalism of field quantization. Von Franz extends the particle into the domain of synchronicity, invoking the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox to suggest that particles participate in a non-local ‘absolute knowledge.’ Schwartz, most unusually, maps wave-particle duality onto the Self-parts distinction in Internal Family Systems. Together, these voices render ‘particle’ a liminal concept between discreteness and continuity, substance and relation, locality and wholeness.