Consider the following premises. For all x_8, x_8 is a soldier. For all x_8, if x_8 were a sailor, then x_8 is curious. For all x_8, x_8 is a sailor and x_8 is a carpenter. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: There is at least one x_8 for which x_8 is not curious.
 From the fact that for all x_8, x_8 is a sailor and x_8 is a carpenter we can infer that for all x_8, x_8 is a sailor via universal simplification. From the fact that for all x_8, if x_8 were a sailor, then x_8 is curious, and that for all x_8, x_8 is a sailor we can infer that for all x_8, x_8 is curious via universal modus ponens. From the fact that for all x_8, x_8 is curious, and that for all x_8, x_8 is a soldier we can infer that for all x_8, x_8 is curious and x_8 is a soldier via universal conjunction. Finally, from the fact that for all x_8, x_8 is curious and x_8 is a soldier we can infer that for all x_8, x_8 is curious via universal simplification, which contradicts that There is at least one x_8 for which x_8 is not curious. Therefore, the answer is no.