Consider the following premises. For all x_2, if x_2 plays a game, then x_2 is a musician. For all x_2, if x_2 were bored, then x_2 is playing a game. For all x_2, x_2 is not a musician. For all x_2, if x_2 plays a game, then x_2 is bored. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_2 for which x_2 is bored.
 From the fact that for all x_2, if x_2 plays a game, then x_2 is a musician, and that for all x_2, x_2 is not a musician we can infer that for all x_2, x_2 will not play a game. From the fact that for all x_2, if x_2 were bored, then x_2 is playing a game, and that for all x_2, if x_2 plays a game, then x_2 is bored we can infer that for all x_2, x_2 is bored if and only if x_2 will play a game. Finally, from the fact that for all x_2, x_2 is bored if and only if x_2 will play a game, and that for all x_2, x_2 will not play a game we can infer that for all x_2, x_2 is not bored, which contradicts that There is at least one x_2 for which x_2 is bored. Therefore, the answer is no.