Any precautious discourse about a beginning diminishes its inaugural force.
If one explains to another how to eat while the second eats by himself, the speaker looses the primacy over the action of his intended disciple.
Apart from such trivial examples, we have to question whether is recommended an inaugural beginning. It is, since we know that the world is a chain of happenings. Every event should grant its specific by mastering its beginning, development and end.
And a recommended action could never constitute one that really happens. This is one source of believing that some things have merely an appearance of existence: when particular things or events do not survive by themselves.
For the domain of morality, the lack of precautions prior to actions equates to an abolishment of the normative discourse. We cannot prescribe moral rules without assuming that the actions so prescribed loose their similitude with the other non-moral processes independently developed.
This assumption bears on the further assumption that it is clearly apart from the reality undetermined by human judgment. In a sense, there is possible to say that morality takes over the risk of being far away from the comfortable support derived from the reality, or that it deliberately places itself outside of the domain of attributing truth to our judgments.
In spite of all above mentioned, if we claim a moral reality apart from a natural one, there is not escape from the simple accusation that such reality has a particular human author or authors.