A mapping of blame. The passage is a short logical fork against the very posture of "faultfinding" (μέμψις). If the matter is DOGMA"in your power" (ἐπὶ σοί) — then why are you doing it (that is, correct yourself)? If "in another's" — whom do you blame? Both addresses of reproach are dead ends, and Marcus sharpens it: what is left to blame is only DOGMA"the atoms or the gods" (ταῖς ἀτόμοις ἢ τοῖς θεοῖς), and "both are mad" (ἀμφότερα μανιώδη) — to reproach chance is senseless, to reproach providence impious.

A ladder instead of a complaint. The conclusion is Οὐδενὶ μεμπτέον, "blame no one," and a practical replacement for grumbling: (1) if you can — "correct" the cause (διόρθωσον, the one who acts); (2) if you cannot — correct "the thing itself" (τὸ πρᾶγμα, the circumstance); (3) if you cannot do even that — then reproach is pointless anyway (εἰκῇ γὰρ οὐδὲν ποιητέον, "do nothing at random"). The "atoms or gods" disjunction is a standing figure of the corpus, and both its horns lead to one place: faultfinding is useless (see DOGMAprovidence-or-atoms; 8.18). There are no term-lemmata in the text. The governing discipline is desire (not to murmur), the sustaining one action (to mend or to accept).