'Of course not.' And is God to be conceived of as a careless, indolent fellow, such as the poet would compare to a stingless drone?
'Impossible.' Can we be right in praising any one who cares for great matters and leaves the small to take care of themselves?
Whether God or man, he who does so, must either think the neglect of such matters to be of no consequence, or he is indolent and careless.

For surely neither of them can be charged with neglect if they fail to attend to something which is beyond their power?
'Certainly not.' And now we will examine the two classes of offenders who admit that there are Gods, but say,--the one that they may be appeased, the other that they take no care of small matters: do they not acknowledge that the Gods are omnipotent and omniscient, and also good and perfect?
'Certainly.' Then they cannot be indolent, for indolence is the offspring of idleness, and idleness of cowardice, and there is no cowardice in God.

'True.' If the Gods neglect small matters, they must either know or not know that such things are not to be regarded.

But of course they know that they should be regarded, and knowing, they cannot be supposed to neglect their duty, overcome by the seductions of pleasure or pain.

'Impossible.' And do not all human things share in soul, and is not man the most religious of animals and the possession of the Gods?
And the Gods, who are the best of owners, will surely take care of their property, small or great.