The term ‘capital’ traverses the depth-psychology corpus along at least four distinct axes, none of which reduces to another. In Fromm’s social-psychological critique, capital names the economic logic that transforms human beings into cogs of an extrahuman machine—a logic he traces to Protestant theology’s destruction of inner dignity and the consequent sacralization of accumulation as an end in itself. In Laudet and White’s recovery science, ‘recovery capital’ is redeployed as a constructive technical concept: the aggregate of social support, spirituality, life meaning, and twelve-step involvement that predicts sustained sobriety and life satisfaction in former poly-substance users. In the I Ching tradition as rendered by Ritsema and Karcher, capital (yi) carries an archaic political-cosmological charge—the populous, fortified city that symbolizes the ruling center of a domain. In Dōgen’s Zen commentary, the capital appears as a spiritual metaphor: where Zhaozhou declares that every household door leads to the capital (eternal peace, Buddhahood), the mountain monastery itself becomes the ‘true capital city of the Dharma.’ These uses share a structural grammar—capital as a center that organizes, concentrates, and distributes value, whether economic, psychosocial, political, or soteriological—making the term a productive node for comparative work across ideology critique, clinical psychology, divination literature, and contemplative tradition.