Consider the following premises. There is at least one x_6 for which x_6 is a writer if and only if x_6 is bored. For all x_6, x_6 is a lawyer. For all x_6, if x_6 climbs a mountain, then x_6 is not a lawyer. For all x_6, x_6 is bored if and only if x_6 will climb a mountain. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_6 for which x_6 is not a writer.
 From the fact that for all x_6, if x_6 climbs a mountain, then x_6 is not a lawyer, and that for all x_6, x_6 is a lawyer we can infer that for all x_6, x_6 will not climb a mountain. From the fact that for all x_6, x_6 is bored if and only if x_6 will climb a mountain, and that for all x_6, x_6 will not climb a mountain we can infer that for all x_6, x_6 is not bored. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_6 for which x_6 is a writer if and only if x_6 is bored, and that for all x_6, x_6 is not bored we can infer that there is at least one x_6 for which x_6 is not a writer. Therefore, the answer is yes.