Milton 1

Scott A. Milton
English XXX
Professor XXX
22 September 2005
Well have the time of our lives!
Dost thou love life?
Then do not squander time,
for thats the stuff that life is made of.
These wise words of the American founding father Benjamin Franklin still ring true
today. In the busy modern world, men and women rush to and fro trying to squeeze seemingly
more and more activities into their already hectic lifestyles. Life is just too short to waste time it
seems, and tomorrow may never come--a notion that dates back at least as far as the great Roman
poet Horace. He epitomized the idea with his precept Carpe diem quam minimum credula
postero[,] which roughly translates to: Seize the day, and put as little trust as you can in the
morrow. This maxim has been influential across the millennia and was particularly inspiring to
a group of seventeenth-century English literary artists known as the Metaphysical Poets. One of
them, Andrew Marvell, embraces the seize the day theme in his most famous of poetic
masterpieces: a passionately urgent and lustful piece entitled To His Coy Mistress. In this
beautiful literary work, Marvell lights up the page with a masterfully wrought and ornately
elaborated plea to a mistress for prompt sexual gratification. The poems speaker attempts to
seductively persuade his mistress to lose her virginity in a sexual encounter with him, but his
argument, although beautiful and impressive, is built upon questionable assumptions and faulty
logic.

2005, 2013 Scott A. Milton All Rights Reserved

Milton 2
The crux of the poem is that time is running out for a coital convergence. The poems
speaker attempts to convince his mistress that if the two of them had all the time in the world, her
shyness would not be a problem, and they would spend ages on courtship; but the speaker
reminds his mistress that time is chasing the two of them down and shall soon lay them to ruin,
so he asserts that, while his mistress is yet vernal and passionate, she and the speaker should
have the sex they want and strive to make the most of their limited time together (stanzas 1-3).
The speaker assures his mistress that, if time were not a factor, the two of them would relax and
leisurely contemplate where to go and how to enjoy the eons (stanza 1.lines 1-4). She could
refuse him across the span of time and still his affection for her would increase (1.9-12). The
speaker professes that he would devote entire ages to admiring and praising each part of his
mistress body, because she is worthy of no less (1.13-20). However, he laments that time is
chasing him down, and they shall soon pass away (2.1-12). The mistress good looks will be no
more, and only worms will take her virginity, for nobody makes love in the grave (2.5-12). For
these reasons, the speaker urges his mistress that, while shes still radiantly young and willing,
she should give in to her passions and they should copulate (3.1-12). He proposes that although
the two of them cant stop time, they can still enjoy it to its fullest (3.13-14) The speakers
argument might seem fairly convincing at first, but with a bit of scrutiny a number of problems
become patently conspicuous.
Some of these problems arise because the argument is founded on a number of moot
presuppositions. For example, the poems speaker just takes it for granted that his mistress will
agree with the notion that women should not make men wait long for sex. He argues that only in
a fantasy world is there sufficient time for coyness and protracted courtship (1.1-20). However,
short human lifetimes dont necessitate abbreviated courtship and his mistress might believe in a

2005, 2013 Scott A. Milton All Rights Reserved

Milton 3
moral obligation to lead a chaste, dignified, and virtuous lifestyle. Moreover, the speaker
assumes that there is no afterlife, and estimates that, since there can be no lovemaking after
death, the window of opportunity for sexual intercourse is short (2.11-12). He implies that
wooing, romance, the value of virginity, and a womans honor are less important in the context
of short human life-spans, and he seems to believe that his mistress will agree that having sex is
an important way to get the most out of life. Furthermore, the speaker clearly assumes that his
mistress actually wants to have sex with him (3.3). He seems confident that she is not coquetting
or attempting to politely repel him. Although he may be correct in his assumptions, the speaker
simply takes them for granted and doesnt argue them directly, even though they could be open
to disagreement. This raises suspicions and doubts regarding the veracity of these claims and
implications, and it also contributes to several flaws in the soundness of the arguments logic.
These flaws, called logical fallacies, are found in several places within the speakers
argument. For instance, in the second stanza of the poem, the speaker makes the mistake of
oversimplifying a complex issue: an error in reasoning known as a False Dichotomy or Either
/ Or Reasoning (Barnet 319). He assumes that his mistress could not possibly lose her virginity
to anyone else besides him, and he presents the situation as having only two possible outcomes:
either she will lose her virginity to him or she will lose it to the worms (2.5-8). Another misdoing
is apparent in the third verse paragraph of the poem, which is also the conclusion of the
argument. There, the speaker makes clear his assumption that his mistress wants him with the
phrase while thy willing soul transpires. (3.3). Since he doesnt directly argue this point, but
states it as a given in the conclusion, he is guilty of a Complex Question Fallacy, also known
as a Loaded Question. (Hurley 150, Fallacy). To make matters worse, the conclusion the
speaker gives would not necessarily follow from his supporting statements: an incorrect

2005, 2013 Scott A. Milton All Rights Reserved

Milton 4
deduction known as a Non Sequitur (Barnet 321). Even if the speaker and his mistress had all
the time in the world, they might not spend ages on courtship or even be together, for that matter.
Immortality wouldnt guarantee that the speaker would stick to his professed plan of endless
courtship or that he really would feel that its alright for his mistress to hold onto her virginity
indefinitely. Other possible scenarios could also be imagined. The speaker argues that since he
and his mistress dont have all the time in the world, they wont spend it on lengthy wooing but,
even if they had all that time, they still conceivably might not spend it together. Similarly,
outside of the speakers hypothetical fantasy, there are a myriad of possible alternate reasons
why the two of them wont spend ages together besides the fact that they dont have all the time
in the world.
Besides that, the way the speaker has arranged his argument is a formal logical fallacy in
and of itself. His argument is structured as a three-part deductive model known as a syllogism,
but the configuration he employed incorrectly mimics a valid form and is representative of a
logical fallacy known as Denying the Antecedent. The problem occurs when a conditional
statement is presented (i.e.- if P is true, then so is Q), and then it is asserted that since the
condition isnt met, the consequent must not be true either (i.e.- P is not true, therefore neither is
Q) (Hurley 333). Often times it will be the case that when the condition is denied, the consequent
is also found not to be true. Indeed, this is the case for the speakers argument. However, the
logical fallacy occurs from assuming that the conditions falsehood was necessarily the cause of
the consequents falsehood. There could be other explanations why that is the case (besides P).
This might sound a bit confusing at first, but consideration of another example might aid in
clarifying the matter. Consider the following argument: If it is raining, the grass is wet. It is not
raining. Therefore, the grass is not wet. (Inverse). A little meditation on that syllogism

2005, 2013 Scott A. Milton All Rights Reserved

Milton 5
should demonstrate that the logic is faulty. Just because it isnt raining outside doesnt mean that
the grass is not wet. There could be other possible scenarios where the grass is wet even though
it isnt raining. Likewise, in the speakers argument, there could be other plausible explanations
as to why the speaker and his mistress wouldnt spend their time together, although perhaps the
one he presents is the best reason. Either way, the deductive form he used is considered to be a
logical fallacy.
In spite of all these problems, I find the poem as a whole to be rather marvelous and
moving. Upon reading it for the first time, I was quite taken by the aesthetic loveliness of the
piece. I was impressed with Marvells mastery of the English language and his sensational use of
imagery. In my opinion, the poem is a splendid work of art and the use of hyperbole within it is
nothing short of spectacular. The exigent exhortation to live lustfully and lovingly before death
descends and destroys seems strikingly sensible. Over the course of my lifetime, several close
friends and family members have passed away and, as I grow older, I can feel the certainty of my
time slipping away. These experiences are something that the majority of people can probably
relate with, since evidence of human mortality is ubiquitous in the world. The speakers
proposition is convincing in this light and might prompt a concerned mistress into action as a
result. Besides, I imagine that if I were a woman, I might be somewhat flattered by a man who
devoted so much of his precious time to compose a beautiful poem on my behalf. Then again,
since the poem doesnt specify to whom it was addressed by name, I might imagine it to be a
generic poem written for repetitive presentation to any and all future prospective mistresses.
Whether the wit was written for one mistress or many, the speaker sang a sweetly
seductive song so pretty, requesting romance to relieve them of virginity, but the vivid verse
veered from validity: plagued with problems of presumption and riddled with ruinous reason.

2005, 2013 Scott A. Milton All Rights Reserved

Milton 6
Was it all worthwhile? Was the speakers argument a success? I will suggest that the answer to
that question is simultaneously yes and no, albeit in different contexts. In considering the
speakers argument as a purely logical attempt to prove that his mistress should have sex with
him, it is a miserable failure. Many of the statements that support the overall argument are based
on assumptions. There are also several instances of fallacious reasoning within the argument.
Nonetheless, even with these substantial flaws, the poem is a tour de force: a smashing success.
It remains compelling and provocative not only as a work of art, but also as an enticingly
emotional approach to persuasion. The striking command of language and the superb use of
hyperbole make this libidinous, impassioned appeal both attractive and alluring. It is especially
moving in its most poignant of reminders: the time of our lives is running out. Since this central
concern is inextricably woven into the fabric of the human condition, it seems likely that the
seize the day theme will continue to remain influential for some time to come: maybe even
until the conversion of the Jews.

2005, 2013 Scott A. Milton All Rights Reserved

Milton 7
Works Cited
Barnet, Sylvan, and Hugo Bedau. Critical Thinking, Reading, and Writing: A Brief Guide to
Argument. 4th ed. Boston.: Bedford/St. Martins, 2002.
Fallacy of Many Questions Wikipedia Encyclopedia Online. Online. America Online.
10 Sep. 2005.
Hurley, Patrick J. A Concise Introduction to Logic. 8th ed. Belmont, CA.
Wadsworth/Thomson, 2003.
"Inverse of a Conditional." www.mathwords.com. Online. America Online. 13 Sep. 2005.

2005, 2013 Scott A. Milton All Rights Reserved