Do Moral truths tell us what to do?

(Somewhat speculative and over-assertive post)

Sometimes people talk as though morality "tells us what to do". Obviously, this is not literal (truth doesn't speak), but I wonder if even the metaphor is misleading. Obviously, according to some theistic conceptions of morality, it really is a case of being told what to do. But, for those of us who think that there are moral truths but not religious ones, it's not clear that we should see things this way.

Rather, I tend to think that moral truths enlighten us as to what we can see for ourselves really ought to be pursued. They reveal certain actions as more worthwhile than others; they show the value in the world. To think that they are somehow this external commanding force is just to slip into old religious habits.

Imagine I go into a restaurant, and order something I've never had before, and decide that I really like it. The proposition "I ought to eat that dish" is true both before and after I eat. I ought to eat that dish whether I knew it or not. So what has changed when I eat? It is not that I realise this proposition and what it tells me to do. I don't quaver under the command of this truth. Rather, when I eat the dish, I come to understand that this dish is indeed delicious. I see for myself that it's the dish I ought to eat.

The same applies for moral claims. Obviously, these are somewhat more serious (the value of a life is somewhat more than the value of a curry). But I suspect that the basic truth remains the same. When you come to see that it's true that happiness has value and ought to be increased, you aren't quaking in your boots at this terrible propositions and its commands. You're coming to see that happiness, for anyone, is something valuable and pursuable.

It might be objected that this is all a little too metaphorical. Still, so was the original metaphor of "being told what to do". So my claim is at least no worse than that, and hopefully a little better.