This paper draws on the ‘Fitting Attitudes’ analysis of value to argue that we should take the concept of fittingness (rather than value) as our normative primitive. I will argue that the fittingness framework enhances the clarity and expressive power of our normative theorizing, allowing us to draw important distinctions that may otherwise be occluded. Along the way, we will see how the fittingness framework can illuminate our understanding of various consequentialist theories, and even adjudicate the rival claims of Act, Global and Scalar Consequentialisms to represent the ‘core’ consequentialist idea.