Within the depth-psychology corpus, ‘Vision’ occupies a remarkably broad semantic field, ranging from the neurophysiology of ocular perception to the transpersonal encounter with the numinous. At one pole, Damasio, Barrett, and Gallagher analyze vision as a predictive, body-anchored sensory process in which the organism maps the world through perspective-bound neural cartography. At another pole, Plotinus, Ibn Arabi through Corbin, and Jung treat vision as the paradigmatic mode of contemplative or theophanic knowing — an activity in which the soul, rather than the eye, performs the fundamental seeing. Jung’s own recorded visions, including his hypnagogic encounter with the green-gold Christ and his engagement with the visions of Ezekiel and Brother Klaus, exemplify depth psychology’s insistence that visionary experience carries autonomous psychic content demanding psychological rather than pathological interpretation. Hillman and Sardello extend this into a Ficinian-ecological register: without vision as animating telos, ‘the people perish.’ The ancient tension between extramission (visual rays projecting outward, as in Plato’s Timaeus) and intromission (impressions received) shadows the entire tradition, reappearing as the question of whether the psyche is passive receiver or active co-creator. The term thus anchors debates about subjectivity, symbolic knowing, prophetic revelation, and the very structure of consciousness.