Psychologization — the act of rendering any event, idea, or cultural formation into a psychological statement, stripping it of its literal crust to expose its soul-dimension — occupies a pivotal position in the depth-psychology corpus, most prominently in James Hillman’s archetypal project. For Hillman, psychologization is not a reductive maneuver but an expansive one: every branch of knowledge, every institutional arrangement, every symptom becomes available to the psyche as a mode of self-reflection. The term ‘psychologizing’ (Hillman’s preferred gerund) designates a disciplined act of seeing through — attending to the ‘what’ rather than the ‘why’ or ‘how,’ and thereby staying with the soul of the matter rather than fleeing into explanation or treatment. Wolfgang Giegerich, by contrast, mounts a searching critique: contemporary psychology psychologizes in the wrong register, attending to ontic (empirical, personal) levels while missing the second-order, logical constitution of the soul. For Giegerich, turning events into experiences — Hillman’s celebrated formula — is itself a suspect move, one that installs the modern ego precisely where mythic openness is required. The corpus thus holds a productive tension between psychologization as liberatory hermeneutic (Hillman) and psychologization as potential epistemological regression (Giegerich), with Jung providing the empirical-structural backdrop against which both positions argue.