Consider the following premises. For all x_5, if x_5 were a carpenter, then x_5 is a server. For all x_5, if x_5 sleeps, then x_5 is working. For all x_5, if x_5 were an artist, then x_5 is sleeping. For all x_5, if x_5 works, then x_5 is a carpenter. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_5 for which the fact that x_5 were an artist does not imply that x_5 is a server.
 From the fact that for all x_5, if x_5 works, then x_5 is a carpenter, and that for all x_5, if x_5 were a carpenter, then x_5 is a server we can infer that for all x_5, if x_5 works, then x_5 is a server. From the fact that for all x_5, if x_5 were an artist, then x_5 is sleeping, and that for all x_5, if x_5 sleeps, then x_5 is working we can infer that for all x_5, if x_5 were an artist, then x_5 is working. Finally, from the fact that for all x_5, if x_5 were an artist, then x_5 is working, and that for all x_5, if x_5 works, then x_5 is a server we can infer that for all x_5, if x_5 were an artist, then x_5 is a server, which contradicts that There is at least one x_5 for which the fact that x_5 were an artist does not imply that x_5 is a server. Therefore, the answer is no.