Consider the following premises. For all x_14, x_14 is not a mechanic. For all x_14, if x_14 drinks water, then x_14 is a mechanic. For all x_14, if x_14 reads a book, then x_14 is drinking water. There is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will read a book or x_14 will drive a car. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: For all x_14, neither x_14 will drive a car nor x_14 will sleep.
 From the fact that for all x_14, if x_14 drinks water, then x_14 is a mechanic, and that for all x_14, x_14 is not a mechanic we can infer that for all x_14, x_14 will not drink water via universal modus tollens. From the fact that for all x_14, if x_14 reads a book, then x_14 is drinking water, and that for all x_14, x_14 will not drink water we can infer that for all x_14, x_14 will not read a book via universal modus tollens. From the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will read a book or x_14 will drive a car, and that for all x_14, x_14 will not read a book we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will drive a car via existential disjunctive syllogism. Finally, from the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will drive a car we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will drive a car or x_14 will sleep via existential addition, which contradicts that For all x_14, neither x_14 will drive a car nor x_14 will sleep. Therefore, the answer is no.