"The world does not speak. Only we do. The world can, once we have programmed ourselves with a language, cause us to hold beliefs. But it cannot propose a language for us to speak. Only other human beings can do that"

Richard Rorty, an influential American theorist, often checked out the intersection of language, culture, and belief. This quote captures among his central concepts regarding the nature of language and its relationship with human understanding.

Rorty suggests that the world itself is silent; it does not communicate with us directly. Rather, we, as humans, are the ones who assign meaning to the world through the development and use of language. This cognitive process begins with our programming as we find out languages in social contexts, mostly through interaction with other people. Language becomes the tool that not just helps with interaction but also forms our understanding of truth.

The 2nd part of the quote acknowledges that as soon as we have internalized language, the world can affect our beliefs. Through observation and experience, the world can challenge or support these beliefs, but crucially, it does so within the structure of the language we, people, have developed. This reflects Rorty's pragmatist view that reality isn't a matter of correspondence with an unbiased reality, but rather, coherence within an offered linguistic and cultural context.

The last assertion that only other humans can propose language highlights the social nature of language acquisition and advancement. Our understanding of the world is moderated by the linguistic and cultural constructs shared by our communities. Language develops through collective human experience and interaction, highlighting the importance of discussion and cultural exchange.

Overall, Rorty's viewpoint invites reflection on how deeply intertwined language is with our understanding of truth. It challenges the notion of an objective world independent of human analysis and highlights the role of common language practices in forming our interactions with the world. His view lines up with a wider philosophical custom that questions the separability of thought, language, and the external world.