[This answer turned out to be much longer than what I'd intended to write, so let me summarize by saying that the frequent appearance of $\rho$ and the "dot" action in the representation theory of $\mathfrak g$ is very closely related to the geometry of the flag variety of $\mathfrak g$.]
This is actually a fairly deep question. Your suspicion that there may be multiple answers is correct, but there might be some surprising connections between seemingly unrelated answers. Let me give one possible thread of explanation. The underlying principle is that the appearance of $\rho$ and the "dot" action $w\cdot\lambda=w(\lambda+\rho)-\rho$ in representation theory is closely related to the geometry of the flag variety.
In representation theory, oneOne of the first appearances ofplaces one meets $\rho$ (and the dot action) is in the Weyl character formula, which states that if $V$ is an irrep of $\mathfrak g$ of highest weight $\lambda$ then
$$ \text{ch} V = \frac{\sum_{w\in W} (-1)^{l(w)} e^{w(\lambda+\rho)-\rho}}{\sum_{w \in W} (-1)^{l(w)} e^{w\rho - \rho}}. $$
I won't bother explaining what all these symbols mean or where they live as all this is fairly standardWeyl character formula. What I will point out isA theorem of Kostant shows that the right-hand side kind of looks like it couldformula can be written as the ratio of two Euler characteristics. There is indeed a way to write it out as such. The key phrase here is "BGG resolution" but let me stick to something more basic (due to Bott and Kostant). If we let $\mathfrak g = \mathfrak n \oplus \mathfrak h \oplus \mathfrak n^-$ be the triangular decomposition of $\mathfrak g$, then we have that
$$ \text{ch} V = \frac{\chi(\mathfrak n, V)}{\chi(\mathfrak n, \mathbb C)}, $$
where $\chi(\mathfrak n, V)$ denotes the Euler characteristic of the Lie algebra cohomology $H^\ast(\mathfrak n, V)$ and $\mathbb C$ denotes the trivial module. To get the WCF from this, we use a theorem of Kostant which states that
$$ H^i(\mathfrak n, V) = \bigoplus_{w \in W, l(w)=i} \mathbb C_{w(\lambda+\rho)-\rho}. $$
This is a decomposition of $H^i(\mathfrak n, V)$ as an $\mathfrak h$-moduleEuler characteristics. In view ofFrom this perspective, we can explain the appearance of $\rho$$w \cdot \lambda$ and the "dot" action $w \cdot \lambda = w(\lambda+\rho)-\rho$$w\cdot0$ in the WCF by saying that the weights $w\cdot\lambda$ are those that appear in $H^\ast(\mathfrak n, V)$. But this isn't really very satisfying, so let's work a bit harder.
A result that is very closely related to Kostant's theorem about $H^\ast(\mathfrak n, V)$ isultimately explained by the Borel–Weil–Bott theorem; in fact, the BWB theorem is equivalent to Kostant's theorem in the sense that if you have one then you can prove the other. Roughly speaking, the BWB theorem describes the cohomology of certain line bundles over the flag variety of $\mathfrak g$. To givethese are the actual statement we need to workweights appearing in the group setting. So let $G$ beweight space decomposition of the simply connected complex semisimple Lie group withrelevant Lie algebra cohomology modules, namely $\mathfrak g$$H^*(\mathfrak n, V^\lambda)$ and let $B$ denote the Borel subgroup corresponding to the Borel subalgebra $\mathfrak b^- = \mathfrak h \oplus \mathfrak n^-$. Then the flag variety can be identified with the space$H^\ast(\mathfrak n, V^0)$, where $G/B$. Each$\mathfrak n = \bigoplus_{\alpha>0} \mathfrak g_\alpha$ and (integral)$V^\mu$ denotes the irrep of highest weight $\lambda$ produces a $G$-equivariant line bundle $L_\lambda := G \times_\lambda B$ over $G/B$ and BWB tells us what $H^\ast(G/B,L_\lambda)$ is$\mu$. There are two cases:
either there is no $w\in W$ such that $w\cdot \lambda$ is dominant, or
there is a unique $w\in W$ such that $w\cdot \lambda$ is dominant.
The second case is the one of interest to us: BWB tells us that inWe can rephrase this case $H^i(G/B,L_\lambda)$ is zero except in degree $i=l(w)$, in which case $H^{l(w)}(G/B,L_\lambda)$ isgeometric terms by invoking the irreducible $G$-module"geometric analogue" of weightKostant's theorem, i.e. the $w\cdot\lambda$Borel–Weil–Bott theorem.
We're now very close to giving an explanation for Kostant's description of the appearanceLie algebra cohomology of $\rho$ and the dot action. All we need is one last simple observation:$\mathfrak n = \mathfrak g /\mathfrak b^-$ with coefficients in an irrep translates into a representation-theoretic description of the sheaf cohomology of certain line bundles over $G/B$ must satisfy Serre duality. In our setting, this is the assertion that $H^i(G/B,L_\lambda)$ and $H^{n-i}(G/B, L_\lambda^\ast \otimes K)$ are dual, where$L_\lambda$ $n = \dim G/B$ and(constructed using integral weights $K$ is$\lambda$) over the canonical bundle $G/B$. It turns out thatflag variety $K$ itself is one$G/B^-$ of these $L_\lambda$'s: in fact, $K = L_{-2\rho}$$\mathfrak g$. From hereConsequently, a simple computation shows that the appearance of $\rho$ and the dot action is a manifestation of Serre duality.
There are also several other geometric explanations for the appearance of $\rho$ (e.g. the existence of equivariant spin structures on the flag variety)shows up in this description, but my answer is already long enough that I should stop here and maybe give another answer later.
Edit: But let me at least give an example of all this! Let $G = \operatorname{SL}_2\mathbb C$ and $B$ the subgroup of lower triangular matrices, so that $G/B = \mathbb P^1$ time it's accompanied by a shift in degree. The set of weights hereThis in turn can be identified with $\mathbb Z$ andexplained by Serre duality; the linekey fact is that canonical bundle $L_n$ corresponding to the weightof $n\in\mathbb Z$$G/B^-$ turns out to be $\mathcal O(n)$$L_{-2\rho}$. Also
So, $\rho = 1$in some sense, so that the canonical bundle is $\mathcal O(-2)$. Serre duality then says that $H^0(\mathbb P^1, \mathcal O(n))$ and $H^1(\mathbb P^1, \mathcal O(n)^\ast \otimes O(-2)) = H^1(\mathbb P^1, \mathcal O(-n-2))$ are dual as representationsappearance of $G$, so they're$\rho$ and the dot action in fact isomorphic. (For general $G$, if $V$ is an irrep of of highest weight $\lambda$ its dual $V^\ast$ is an irrep of highest weight $-w_0 \lambda$, where $w_0$ is the longest elementWCF can be thought of the Weyl group. For $\operatorname{SL}_2$, $w_0=-1$, so $V \cong V^\ast$.) Now compare this with what BWB says..as a manifestation of Serre duality.
[N.B. This example is actually very fundamental for the general case:a condensed version of my lengthy original answer. The old version can be found in the original proof of BWB, Serre duality applied to $\operatorname{SL}_2$-reps was at the core of the argumentedit history.]