The sexual instinct occupies a contested, generative centre of the depth-psychological corpus. Freud’s foundational intervention in the Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality (1905) dismantles the presumed unity of instinct and object, arguing that the sexual instinct is ‘in the first instance independent of its object’ and is itself a composite of component instincts subject to developmental vicissitudes, sublimation, and perverse fixation. The instinct thus becomes the hinge between biology and psychic life, between somatic excitation and mental representation. Jung accepts sexuality as a real and ‘indisputably creative power’ but resists its elevation to a universal explanatory principle, insisting that libido designates a broader psychic energy of which the sexual instinct is one, albeit prominent, partial expression. This divergence generates the central theoretical tension of the corpus: whether sexuality is the sovereign organiser of psychic life or one instinct among several, including self-preservation, the will to power, hunger, and a creative drive. Neumann extends the field by situating the sexual instinct within an archaic uroboric matrix, tracking its emergence from alimentary pre-sexuality. Rank, Hillman, and von Franz each interrogate the reduction of love or creativity to sexual instinct, while Panksepp grounds the discussion in affective neuroscience, mapping the subcortical substrates of lust. The term therefore marks the fault-line between somatic determinism and symbolic transformation across the entire tradition.