The argument from the gods. The therapy of intolerance toward people by a comparison of scales. The gods, being immortal (ἀθάνατοι), are condemned to endure the bad (φαῦλοι) not for years but for "so long an age (αἰών)" — forever, without pause; and yet they "are not vexed" (οὐ δυσχεραίνουσιν). More than that — "besides this they even DOGMAcare for them in every way" (κήδονται παντοίως): DOGMAprovidence does not merely tolerate the vicious but does them good (the sun rises on the wicked too — cf. the theodicy of 06-36). The model is given as an imitation of god: infinite endurance plus active care.

The argument from smallness and shame. The contrast is crushing. You are not immortal: "all but ceasing" (ὅσον οὐδέπω λήγειν μέλλων); you have to endure not an eternity but a handful of days. And still you "flag" (ἀπαυδᾷς — "give up, let your hands drop"). A double disproportion: the gods endure forever and do not murmur — you will not live long enough to finish murmuring. The closing sting removes even the right to contempt: "and this when you are yourself one of the bad (εἷς ὢν τῶν φαύλων)." The misanthrope judges the very kind he belongs to; in resenting the vice of humans you resent your own (cf. 7.65 — not to become like the inhuman; 8.5; 05-33). The governing discipline is action (to endure and care, as the gods do); the sustaining one, desire (not to be vexed).