Consider the following premises. For all x_14, if x_14 reads a book, then x_14 is curious. For all x_14, if x_14 were a police officer, then x_14 is a nurse. For all x_14, x_14 is a police officer or x_14 will not drink water. There is at least one x_14 for which if x_14 were curious, then x_14 is drinking water. For all x_14, if x_14 were a nurse, then x_14 is reading a book. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: For all x_14, if is not true that x_14 will read a book if and only if x_14 is curious.
 From the fact that for all x_14, if x_14 were a police officer, then x_14 is a nurse, and that for all x_14, if x_14 were a nurse, then x_14 is reading a book we can infer that for all x_14, if x_14 were a police officer, then x_14 is reading a book via universal transitivity. From the fact that for all x_14, x_14 is a police officer or x_14 will not drink water we can infer that for all x_14, if x_14 drinks water, then x_14 is a police officer via universal rewriting. From the fact that for all x_14, if x_14 drinks water, then x_14 is a police officer, and that for all x_14, if x_14 were a police officer, then x_14 is reading a book we can infer that for all x_14, if x_14 drinks water, then x_14 is reading a book via universal transitivity. From the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which if x_14 were curious, then x_14 is drinking water, and that for all x_14, if x_14 drinks water, then x_14 is reading a book we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which if x_14 were curious, then x_14 is reading a book via existential transitivity. Finally, from the fact that for all x_14, if x_14 reads a book, then x_14 is curious, and that there is at least one x_14 for which if x_14 were curious, then x_14 is reading a book we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will read a book if and only if x_14 is curious via existential biconditional introduction, which contradicts that For all x_14, if is not true that x_14 will read a book if and only if x_14 is curious. Therefore, the answer is no.