Consider the following premises. forall z: R_4(z) <-> W_4(z). forall z: ~T(z). forall z: R_4(z) -> W_4(z). forall z: R_4(z) <-> T(z). Can we infer exists z: W_4(z) from them?
 From forall z: R_4(z) <-> W_4(z) we can infer forall z: W_4(z) -> R_4(z). From forall z: R_4(z) -> W_4(z), forall z: W_4(z) -> R_4(z) we can infer forall z: R_4(z) <-> W_4(z). From forall z: R_4(z) <-> T(z), forall z: ~T(z) we can infer forall z: ~R_4(z). Finally, from forall z: R_4(z) <-> W_4(z), forall z: ~R_4(z) we can infer forall z: ~W_4(z), which contradicts exists z: W_4(z). Therefore, the answer is no.