Physis — the Greek term for nature, growth, and the generative principle of things — occupies a pivotal and contested position across the depth-psychological corpus. The Presocratic philosophers made physis the foundational category of existence: for the Ionian naturalists, nothing existed outside it, collapsing the human, divine, and cosmic into a single order. This monistic horizon is precisely what the depth-psychological tradition both inherits and complicates. Jung, as cited by Edinger, insists that ‘religious statements without exception have to do with the reality of the psyche and not with the reality of physis,’ establishing a constitutive polarity between psyche and physis that structures much of the theoretical enterprise. Edinger traces physis as a living root in modern language — physics, physician, physiology — and as a still-animating presence in the evolution of consciousness. Giegerich presses this further: alchemy, as ‘opus contra naturam,’ had already superseded physis as its horizon, advancing to the logical level and sublating both physis and pneuma within soul as logic. Hillman maps the tension differently, identifying a ‘quantitative approach’ in psychology as the viewpoint of physis toward psyche — an Aristotelian naturalism contrasted with a Platonic soul-orientation. The Stoic gradation from tenor through physique to soul (Sedley/Long) offers yet another framework in which physis marks an intermediate ontological register. What unites these divergent treatments is the recognition that physis is never merely background: it is the term against which depth psychology defines its own distinctive subject matter.