Consider the following premises. For all x_10, if x_10 climbs a mountain, then x_10 is a mechanic. For all x_10, x_10 will climb a mountain or x_10 is a carpenter. There is at least one x_10 for which if x_10 were a carpenter, then x_10 is a mechanic. For all x_10, x_10 is a politician. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_10, x_10 is not a mechanic.
 From the fact that for all x_10, if x_10 climbs a mountain, then x_10 is a mechanic, that there is at least one x_10 for which if x_10 were a carpenter, then x_10 is a mechanic, and that for all x_10, x_10 will climb a mountain or x_10 is a carpenter we can infer that there is at least one x_10 for which x_10 is a mechanic. From the fact that there is at least one x_10 for which x_10 is a mechanic, and that for all x_10, x_10 is a politician we can infer that some mechanics are politicians. Finally, from the fact that some mechanics are politicians we can infer that there is at least one x_10 for which x_10 is a mechanic, which contradicts that For all x_10, x_10 is not a mechanic. Therefore, the answer is no.