Consider the following premises. For all x_6, x_6 is a bartender or x_6 is sad. For all x_6, if x_6 were sad, then x_6 is a lawyer. There is at least one x_6 for which if x_6 were a lawyer, then x_6 is sad. For all x_6, if x_6 were a bartender, then x_6 is a lawyer. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_6, x_6 is not a lawyer.
 From the fact that there is at least one x_6 for which if x_6 were a lawyer, then x_6 is sad, and that for all x_6, if x_6 were sad, then x_6 is a lawyer we can infer that there is at least one x_6 for which x_6 is a lawyer if and only if x_6 is sad. From the fact that there is at least one x_6 for which x_6 is a lawyer if and only if x_6 is sad we can infer that there is at least one x_6 for which if x_6 were sad, then x_6 is a lawyer. Finally, from the fact that for all x_6, if x_6 were a bartender, then x_6 is a lawyer, that there is at least one x_6 for which if x_6 were sad, then x_6 is a lawyer, and that for all x_6, x_6 is a bartender or x_6 is sad we can infer that there is at least one x_6 for which x_6 is a lawyer, which contradicts that For all x_6, x_6 is not a lawyer. Therefore, the answer is no.