Why can people, even in good faith, attribute such different, conflicting, or even contradictory, meanings to the term ‘justice’? Why can this word turn out to be ambiguous?

In my view, this depends on the content it expresses.

And this content is in turn the product of differing, deep beliefs about human relationships. It is the product of the weltanschauung, or philosophical approach, as it were, that each person, perhaps unconsciously, has about the meaning of existence, about humankind and how it is supposed to evolve and progress, the optimist's or pessimist's view of it, and hence the value attributed to the individual.

Some people see humanity essentially as an animal species, governed by the same rules which regulate the development of other living species. They take an attitude of distrust towards the individual who is regarded as a non-individualised part of the mass, and is somewhat relegated to the background, slipping out of focus.

From this perspective, the progress of human beings takes place by selection. The strong, the cunning, the powerful, the ‘fit’, are selected ‘naturally’. This gives dignity to their person, makes it deserving of consideration, and defines them as individuals. The weak, the different, those who lag behind, who do not fit properly into this design, get progressively eliminated.

The consequence of this deep belief is that the design whereby progress is achieved by discarding the unfit, must be supported. If nature puts living beings on a scale, if it leaves in the shadow those who cannot keep up, if it allows the elimination of those who hamper development, the task of human beings – who have acquired the ability to do so – is to contribute to that design.

Typical of this view is the idea that humanity is organised into a hierarchical scale: those who have no abilities must be discarded; those who are unfit should occupy the lowest steps, and progressively, the more qualities one possesses, the higher the level one is assigned to, right up to the top reserved for the chosen few, the best, the most cunning, the strongest, the fittest. And it often happens that all these qualities are attributed to one person, who is attributed the role of supreme chief – just like in animal communities.