The term ‘synchronistic’ functions in the depth-psychology corpus as both an adjective modifying specific classes of event and as a theoretical marker distinguishing Jung’s acausal principle from ordinary temporal coincidence. Jung himself introduced the adjectival form to discriminate ‘synchronistic’ (pertaining to the meaningful coincidence of inner and outer events across time) from ‘synchronous’ (mere clock-time simultaneity), thereby insisting on the primacy of meaning over mere temporal contiguity. Von Franz, the most systematic elaborator of the concept, deploys ‘synchronistic’ across a wide range: individual clinical events, the Chinese thought-world of the Tao, divination systems, and even what she calls ‘synchronistic thinking’ among archaic peoples. A central tension in the corpus concerns scope — whether ‘synchronistic’ properly names only those unrepeatable, meaning-laden coincidences observable in individual lives, or whether it extends to cover all instances of ‘acausal orderedness,’ including constants of physics and the properties of natural numbers. A second tension concerns method: Jung himself acknowledged that statistical procedure stands in a relationship of complementarity to synchronistic phenomena, such that statistical observation tends to dissolve the very phenomenon it seeks to measure. Stein, Hall, and Hoeller each attend to the clinical and epistemological implications of the term within analytic practice, while Ponte and Romanyshyn situate it at the interface with quantum physics. The term’s ongoing productive instability — straddling science, metaphysics, and clinical observation — explains its continued centrality in Jungian discourse.