Among the following, who has differentiated between Natural and Conventional Inequality?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct option is 4:
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in his seminal work *A Discourse on the Origin of Inequality* (1755), explicitly differentiated between two primary types of inequality. The question refers to this fundamental distinction. Rousseau termed the first type **Natural or Physical Inequality**, which arises from nature and includes differences in age, health, bodily strength, and mental or spiritual qualities. He considered these differences to be unavoidable and, importantly, not the main source of social problems. The second type he termed **Moral or Political Inequality** (referred to here as Conventional Inequality), which is established, or at least authorized, by the consent of men. This form of inequality encompasses differences in wealth, honour, power, and social status. For Rousseau, conventional inequality is a man-made creation that emerges with the establishment of civil society, private property, and laws, and it is this form of inequality that corrupts man and is the principal source of moral and political decline. His work focuses heavily on tracing the historical and psychological development of society that led to the institutionalization of this harmful, conventional inequality.

The incorrect option is 1:
Plato, the ancient Greek philosopher, focused primarily on distinguishing between individuals based on their inherent nature and capacities, particularly in his concept of a just society presented in *The Republic*. He posited that individuals possess different levels of rational, spirited, or appetitive characteristics, leading to a natural hierarchy of classes (Philosopher-Kings, Auxiliaries, and Producers). While this acknowledges inherent differences (similar to natural inequality), Plato's main concern was a just social structure (an artificial or conventional arrangement) rooted in these natural differences, not a specific modern philosophical differentiation between "natural" versus "conventional" inequality as a contrast between physical attributes and man-made institutions. His analysis preceded the Enlightenment-era contract theories and the specific concerns of modern inequality.

The incorrect option is 2:
Aristotle, another influential Greek philosopher, discussed inequality primarily in the context of political rule and citizenship, most notably in *Politics*. He defended the concept of "natural slavery," arguing that some individuals were naturally suited to be ruled, while others were suited to rule. This view accepts a form of natural hierarchy based on perceived differences in rational capacity. Furthermore, he analyzed the causes of revolutions, often linking them to disparities between the rich and the poor, which touches upon socioeconomic inequality. However, like Plato, Aristotle’s work pre-dates the Enlightenment discourse that sharply separated innate, physical differences (natural) from inequalities created by social contract, property, and arbitrary laws (conventional). His framework revolved around virtue, capacity, and the necessity of political structure, not the dualistic concept presented in the question.

The incorrect option is 3:
Thomas Hobbes, a key figure in social contract theory, addressed the state of nature in his work *Leviathan* by famously arguing that men are born relatively equal in their physical and mental faculties—meaning that any slight natural differences are irrelevant because even the weakest man can, through cunning or combination with others, kill the strongest. This fundamental equality in the state of nature is precisely what leads to the "war of all against all." Therefore, Hobbes did not establish a core distinction between "Natural" and "Conventional" inequality; rather, he downplayed the importance of natural inequality to emphasize that peace and social stability (conventional order) are achieved by submitting to a sovereign power that creates order out of natural chaos and relative equality. His focus was on the mechanism of consent that establishes political authority, not the degrees of pre-existing disparities.