Consider the following premises. For all x_17, x_17 is fast if and only if x_17 is a nurse. For all x_17, if x_17 were a nurse, then x_17 is playing tennis. For all x_17, if x_17 plays tennis, then x_17 is a nurse. For all x_17, x_17 is a poet if and only if x_17 will play tennis. There is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is not fast. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_17, x_17 is a poet.
 From the fact that for all x_17, if x_17 plays tennis, then x_17 is a nurse, and that for all x_17, if x_17 were a nurse, then x_17 is playing tennis we can infer that for all x_17, x_17 will play tennis if and only if x_17 is a nurse. From the fact that for all x_17, x_17 is fast if and only if x_17 is a nurse, and that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is not fast we can infer that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is not a nurse. From the fact that for all x_17, x_17 will play tennis if and only if x_17 is a nurse, and that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is not a nurse we can infer that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 will not play tennis. Finally, from the fact that for all x_17, x_17 is a poet if and only if x_17 will play tennis, and that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 will not play tennis we can infer that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is not a poet, which contradicts that For all x_17, x_17 is a poet. Therefore, the answer is no.