Final answer:
Rousseau believed social inequality is caused by oppressive governments and argued for direct democracy. Malthus believed it was a consequence of population growth. Millar thought social inequality was necessary for societal progress. Ferguson saw it as a result of natural inequalities.
Step-by-step explanation:
Rousseau, Malthus, Millar, and Ferguson all had different perspectives on social inequality, but they can be compared and contrasted in several ways.
Rousseau believed that social inequality was a result of oppressive governments and that men should take control of the government to establish a responsive system. He argued for direct democracy.
Malthus, on the other hand, believed that social inequality was a natural consequence of population growth. He thought that the population would always grow faster than food supply, leading to unequal distribution of resources.
Millar, a Scottish historian, believed that social inequality was necessary for societal progress. He argued that divisions of labor and social classes were essential for the development of civilization.
Ferguson, another Scottish philosopher, believed that social inequality was a result of natural inequalities among individuals. He thought that some people were naturally more capable and deserving of wealth and power.
In summary, Rousseau emphasized the role of governments in perpetuating social inequality, Malthus focused on the impact of population growth, Millar argued for the necessity of social classes, and Ferguson saw social inequality as a natural outcome of individual differences.