Consider the following premises. For all x_14, x_14 will climb a mountain. For all x_14, if x_14 plays squash, then x_14 is not climbing a mountain. There is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will play squash. For all x_14, if x_14 were a bartender, then x_14 is not writing a letter. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_14, x_14 is a bartender.
 From the fact that for all x_14, if x_14 plays squash, then x_14 is not climbing a mountain, and that for all x_14, x_14 will climb a mountain we can infer that for all x_14, x_14 will not play squash. From the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will play squash we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will play squash or x_14 will write a letter. From the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will play squash or x_14 will write a letter, and that for all x_14, x_14 will not play squash we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will write a letter. Finally, from the fact that for all x_14, if x_14 were a bartender, then x_14 is not writing a letter, and that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will write a letter we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 is not a bartender, which contradicts that For all x_14, x_14 is a bartender. Therefore, the answer is no.