In addition to the repeated misrepresentation of my position, a common theme among the people who demand an apology. I argue against that, but I will use a different example, since my objections are not at all about the RCC in particular, but more generally, are objections to the way they attribute blame collectively in the first place.
I will use as an example the
Invasion of Poland[/ur].
As per the Wikipedia page, it was [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland]an attack on the Republic of Poland by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union which marked the beginning of World War II.
Arguably, it had already started in China. But that's not the issue here. The issue is:
who actually attacked whom? In which sense did Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union attacked?
If we were to list the agents with minds - i.e., agents with subjective experience - who decided to attack, invade, kill, etc., our list of course would contain Hitler and Stalin. And it would also contain the names of high-rank officers who made different decisions to attack in such-and-such place, etc. And the names - assuming we know them - of many lower-ranked officers who decided to fire a mortar round, advance with a tank, and whatnot. And then...
then our list stops. There is no further mind called 'Nazi Germany' (NG) or 'Soviet Union' (SU). Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union did exist, but they were not entities with minds beyond those of some of the individuals in them. Now, Nazi Germany of course is not the same as the individuals in it - it could be dissolved if they continued to exist, for example -, so I would say it was some of the activity of some of those people. But in any event, here is something Nazi Germany (or the Soviet Union) was
not. It was not an agent with collective mind, hive mind, or otherwise a mind - an entity with subjective experience - of any kind, beyond the minds of individual humans.
Before I go on, let me point out that some philosophers disagree with the above and claim that NG and SU had minds beyond those of individual humans. I would say they are mistaken and even if they were not, it would not be warranted to believe such minds exist, let alone that they are moral agents. But I grant I have not argued for that, because I have not seen any good evidence that anyone here is claiming there is such a mind.
If someone wants to claim that, please let me know, and I will tackle the claim that NG and SU (or the RCC) had or has a mind of its own, beyond individual human minds.
So, that potential objection aside, we have that NG and the SU were not minds beyond individual human minds. Suppose now that all of the human individuals who behaved immorally in context of the event called 'Invasion of Poland' have been properly blamed and punished as they deserved. Then
no one else deserves punishment. That is it. There is no further blameworthy agent involved. There is no further agent who should apologize, either, because there is no other agent that did anything wrong (in the context of that event, of course). And it would be improper to place further blame, or demand further apologies. It would be a confusion if sincere.
Furthermore, imagine that Merkel sincerely apologized for the atrocities committed by Germans in the Invasion of Poland. Note that that would
not be equivalent to saying that some Germans behaved horribly immorally in that context, and that she condemns their actions. If she were to say that, she would be blaming other people for their wrongdoings,
but she would not be apologizing. And if she were to further say that she is sorry for the loss of innocent lives and the suffering of the innocent in the sense one says 'sorry for your loss', she would be expressing sympathy for the victims and their families, etc., but
she would not be apologizing. If she were to say she wants to relay an apology made by the Germans involved, she would be either lying or deluded (since most did not apologize and she should find that obvious, for example), and she would be falsely claiming to relay someone else's apology, but
she would not be apologizing. None of that would be an apology. Assuming Merkel does not believe that NG or Germany have minds beyond those of individual humans (which would be an irrational belief for her to have), if she were to apologize sincerely for the atrocities committed by Germans in the Invasion of Poland, she would be
implicitly acknowledging guilt on her part. And that would be a confusion.
Now, if you think that Merkel, if she were to sincerely apologize for the atrocities committed by Germans in the Invasion of Poland, would not be implicitly acknowledging guilt on her part, then let me ask you:
Which mind (i.e., agent with a mind) would she be attributing moral guilt to? Agents other than herself only? But that would be an instance of blaming others, not an apology. No one? Then how is that an apology, if no one is being attributed blame? What would it even
mean to apologize? Another option? Fair enough, could you please explain the other option, in a way that a reasonable reader can understand?
I argue that the same applies to the RCC, the pope, and so on.
