Consider the following premises. forall x_17: P_17(x_17) -> Q_17(x_17). exists x_17: ~P_17(x_17). forall x_17: Q_17(x_17) -> P_17(x_17). forall x_17: Q(x_17) -> U_1(x_17). forall x_17: U_1(x_17) -> Q_17(x_17). Can we infer forall x_17: Q(x_17) from them?
 From forall x_17: P_17(x_17) -> Q_17(x_17), forall x_17: Q_17(x_17) -> P_17(x_17) we can infer forall x_17: P_17(x_17) <-> Q_17(x_17). From forall x_17: P_17(x_17) <-> Q_17(x_17), exists x_17: ~P_17(x_17) we can infer exists x_17: ~Q_17(x_17). From forall x_17: U_1(x_17) -> Q_17(x_17), exists x_17: ~Q_17(x_17) we can infer exists x_17: ~U_1(x_17). Finally, from forall x_17: Q(x_17) -> U_1(x_17), exists x_17: ~U_1(x_17) we can infer exists x_17: ~Q(x_17), which contradicts forall x_17: Q(x_17). Therefore, the answer is no.