Planetary Consciousness occupies a liminal position within the depth-psychology corpus, functioning simultaneously as a transpersonal category of experience, an ecological-ethical imperative, and an astrological-archetypal principle. Grof’s empirical LSD research provides the phenomenological bedrock: subjects report identification with the totality of life on this planet, traversing phylogenetic history, ecological interdependence, and even the consciousness of inorganic matter—experiences that challenge prevailing paradigms and generate heightened sensitivity to ecological crisis. Rudhyar, drawing from Jungian and theosophical currents, theorizes planetary consciousness as a collective-organic register distinct from individual selfhood, mapped onto astronomical cycles and the ‘planetarization’ of the psyche. Tarnas positions it within a larger cosmological re-enchantment: the disclosure of archetypal patterns connecting inner and outer worlds, wherein planetary archetypes are not merely symbolic but participatory intelligences shaping historical epochs and individual experience alike. Thompson’s biosemiotic perspective adds a naturalist foundation, arguing that life itself operates as a planetary-scale communicative entity. Aurobindo’s integral philosophy frames analogous states as cosmic consciousness accessible through spiritual practice. Across these voices runs a shared tension: whether planetary consciousness names an experiential state achieved by individual subjects, a pre-existing ontological reality, or an evolutionary mandate for collective humanity. Its stakes, in every register, are simultaneously psychological, ecological, and civilizational.