This paper aims to explain why the question about “the objectivity of values” is a bad one. It begins by investigating its historical roots in Plato and in the philosophy of the seventeeth and eighteenth centuries. It then argues that the question presupposes a distinction between qualities of objects that are “in them” and those that are “in us,” a distinction Rorty suggests is pointless. In light of this stance, it goes on to criticize J. L. Mackie’s famous argument that there are no objective values, the notion of moral principles, and the very idea of moral philosophy.