Consider the following premises. There is at least one x_13 for which if x_13 were a soldier, then x_13 is curious. For all x_13, x_13 is a doctor or x_13 will cook. For all x_13, if x_13 were a doctor, then x_13 is a soldier. For all x_13, if x_13 cooks, then x_13 is a soldier. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: There is at least one x_13 for which x_13 is curious or x_13 will drive a car.
 From the fact that for all x_13, if x_13 were a doctor, then x_13 is a soldier, that for all x_13, if x_13 cooks, then x_13 is a soldier, and that for all x_13, x_13 is a doctor or x_13 will cook we can infer that for all x_13, x_13 is a soldier via universal disjunction elimination. From the fact that there is at least one x_13 for which if x_13 were a soldier, then x_13 is curious, and that for all x_13, x_13 is a soldier we can infer that there is at least one x_13 for which x_13 is curious via existential modus ponens. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_13 for which x_13 is curious we can infer that there is at least one x_13 for which x_13 is curious or x_13 will drive a car via existential addition. Therefore, the answer is yes.