I think the fundamental question here is: what is the natural state, equality or inequality? If inequality is the natural state (which I think it is), it can't be a "purpose", it just exists.
I'm glad that you found an excuse not to violate the laws of nature, but that doesn't mean you don't need a reason. It means you already have one.
Not everything in life is under our control.
>Not everything in life is under our control.
Who cares!? Are you going to spend your time repeating trivially useless facts? You have said nothing at all that allows you to distinguish between what can and can't be controlled. 'Naturalness' isn't it, for what should be obvious reasons.
You do not know what is under your control until you try to control it.
I disagree. Man-made phenomena can all be fought and reversed (so it's worth trying), but not all natural ones can (so it can be worth trying to fight them, but one must also know when to give up).
This started with the statement "Social inequality without serving a conscious purpose", which implies (or at least that's how I interpreted it) that social inequality is some man-made phenomenon, and we'd all be equal if not for some evil overlords "keeping us down". I disagree with this theory.