Avot156

2:
The first idea which Rabbi Ĥananya ben-Teradyon proposes is that when two (or more) people sit down together they should include words of Torah in their conversation; if they do not their conference may be considered to be that of 'ne'er-do-wells'. The Hebrew termed used is letzim. Where this term occurs in scripture (and it does so most often in the book of Proverbs) it is usually rendered as 'scoffer'. But it seems that the sages understood the term in a wider sense – still derogatory. For example, a biblical verse which contains this term is quoted by one sage in the Gemara [Yevamot 63b] in order to 'recommend' the divorce of a contentious, nagging woman.

3:
Any term which is mildly derogatory can be understood for the word in its present context. The proposal of Rabbi Ĥananya is "proven" by reference to the first verse of the book of Psalms. This verse praises the person who keeps far from unsavoury people; but the connection with Torah study is to be found only in the second verse, which is not quoted in our mishnah:

4:
When two or more people do exchange words of Torah God is deemed to be present among them. This is "proven" by reference to a verse from the prophet Malachi [3:16]:

5:
A verse from Lamentations is quoted – quite out of context – in order to encourage us to study Torah even when we are alone. The verse is understood as indicating that one who sits alone and studies Torah will "take it" – i.e. his reward. (In the original context the phrase has the opposite meaning: it is good for a young man to become accustomed to suffering so that when it happens he will accept his punishment like a man.)

On humility and pride, we have the attempt to balance between the extremes in the Torah and all subsequent ethical literature. To rely on humility may be counterproductive. The sinner may say: what’s the use, I am nothing. To appeal to the pride of standing with God, as in the Neilah prayer. Vatakirehu Laamod Lefonekhah, may lead to complacency. How can God damn me if I am so great and so important to Him? More to the point of ethical efficacy are the four questions asked us at the final judgment: Did you deal honestly? Did you engage in reproduction? Did you study Torah? Did you anticipate Redemption? These questions apply whether we are small or great. When we appeal to God, we cannot taint Him with impurity and other faults. But we do appeal to His Humility, as in the passage: Kol Makom Sheata Motzei Gedulato, At Motzei Anvetanuto. God is also modest in His Majesty. Moses, after the incident of the Spies, appeals to God’s Pride. Veata Yigdal No Koach Adonai. Now let the Power of the Lord be magnified. On Rosh Hashanah we do not say Hallel, because in the Court of Justice it is not fitting to flatter the Judge. But all year we Magnify and Sanctify Him in the Kaddish.

However, Jim Feldman has a much less sanguine view of Akavya and his teaching:

While neither a scholar of Hebrew nor a poet, and fully aware of the folly of the phrase "exact translation", I have a distaste for putting words (in English) into the mouths of the better writers of the Tanach. In the case of: ma-enosh ki tizkeranu uven-adam ki tifkedenu – a couplet that has a wonderful taste in my mouth – I much prefer a more literal rendering, at least as I understand the words: "What is mankind that you remember us,
Or the son of man that you think of us." What a statement of our small place in the universe! But it is a statement of wonder, not contempt. Then I look at the disgust in ben-Mahalal'el for the astonishing wonders of life, and I have to wonder what he had to do to get him through the act that got him a son. What a sorry, self-hating excuse for a man. The Tanach is full of commands and advice on how to live a good and worthy life and threats about what will happen if we don't, but nowhere does it teach contempt for creation or life. Why should we honor this man?

I respond:

As far as the translation is concerned: I used to make my own translations of the texts; but then I started following the JPS translation. Maybe I should revert to my former practice. (Jim's translation is grammatically innacurate.) As far as an assessment of Akavya – his philosophy, actions and personality – is concerned I shall offer a different view from another participant next time.