Consider the following premises. For all x_16, x_16 is not a musician. For all x_16, if x_16 were an office clerk, then x_16 is sleeping. For all x_16, x_16 is an office clerk if and only if x_16 will play a game. For all x_16, x_16 is a musician if and only if x_16 will sleep. For all x_16, if x_16 were a nurse, then x_16 is playing a game. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_16 for which x_16 is a nurse.
 From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 is an office clerk if and only if x_16 will play a game we can infer that for all x_16, if x_16 plays a game, then x_16 is an office clerk. From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 plays a game, then x_16 is an office clerk, and that for all x_16, if x_16 were an office clerk, then x_16 is sleeping we can infer that for all x_16, if x_16 plays a game, then x_16 is sleeping. From the fact that for all x_16, x_16 is a musician if and only if x_16 will sleep, and that for all x_16, x_16 is not a musician we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 will not sleep. From the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 were a nurse, then x_16 is playing a game, and that for all x_16, if x_16 plays a game, then x_16 is sleeping we can infer that for all x_16, if x_16 were a nurse, then x_16 is sleeping. Finally, from the fact that for all x_16, if x_16 were a nurse, then x_16 is sleeping, and that for all x_16, x_16 will not sleep we can infer that for all x_16, x_16 is not a nurse, which contradicts that There is at least one x_16 for which x_16 is a nurse. Therefore, the answer is no.