Within the depth-psychology corpus, ‘value creation’ emerges not as an economic metaphor but as a fundamental ontological category describing how psychic substance is forged through constrained mortal experience. The most sustained and original treatment appears in Cody Peterson’s Homeric-Jungian synthesis, which argues — drawing directly on Jung’s ‘Answer to Job’ — that value is not discovered, inherited, or transmitted but must be created through what Peterson terms ‘Mortality’s Three Constraints’: permanent loss, radical uncertainty, and utter powerlessness. This position carries a sharp theological implication: divine omniscience and immortal consciousness are structurally incapable of generating value, a deficit that compels Jung’s Yahweh toward incarnation. The Homeric vocabulary of thumos, paschō, and tlaō supplies Peterson with an empirical grammar of value-formation, locating the process in the sedimentary accumulation of suffered feeling. Adjacent to this axis, Hillman’s work on the feeling function identifies the thumotic soul as the proper site of relational value-engagement, a site catastrophically marginalized by Platonic rationalism. McGilchrist and Seaford approach the question from orthogonal directions — the former insisting that discursive reason cannot reach the depths where values are apprehended, the latter tracing how coined money reconstituted Greek conceptions of abstract, self-subsisting value. The central tension throughout is between value as substance forged in suffering and value as abstract form imposed from without.