Why might we consider justice to be an essentially contested concept

It is the hope of this brief analysis that the reader will come to a more full and complete understanding of the way in which societal recognition of justice has come to be defined as well as some of the core drawbacks to the way in which this term impacts different individuals and points of view in different ways.
Firstly, one of the core interpretations that were presented by Plato, and individuals before and after him, was that moral virtue is ultimately the definitive aspect of justice. Naturally, within such a definition, two distinct words stand in contrast with one another (Plant, 2011). First of these is “moral” and the second one is “virtue”. Unfortunately, these two are not mutually exclusive and necessarily involve compliments of one another as a function of their own definition. lending the reader to realize that a situation of philosophical analysis is somewhat adulterated by this reality (Rawls, 2011). Further identifications and definitions were predicated upon the fundamental or tacit/innate concept of justice and the belief that it was given by God/god/gods. Although this interpretation was useful in helping individuals to understand the natural rights and concepts of justice that helped to define a given political system, these also fell short due to the fact that they leveraged an understanding “justice” that was predicated upon a particular belief system or religion. Naturally, this was also fundamentally flawed as it promoted one particular set of ideals and interpretations over a litany of others (Ryan, 2009).
A further issue that exists is the fact that even if it is understood in terms of a universal application of fairness and equality under the law, it will invariably place a particular worldview, ethnicity, or culture as a barometer for the way in which this concept should be defined and administered. Looking into the current exhibition of the justice system in most of the developed