Consider the following premises. For all x_17, if x_17 were a carpenter, then x_17 is cooking. There is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is not a taxi driver or x_17 will take a plane. For all x_17, if x_17 cooks, then x_17 is a carpenter. For all x_17, x_17 is a taxi driver or x_17 is a carpenter. For all x_17, x_17 will not cook. For all x_17, x_17 is a writer. Can we infer the following from them? For all x_17, either x_17 is a writer or x_17 will take a plane are not true.
 From the fact that for all x_17, if x_17 cooks, then x_17 is a carpenter, and that for all x_17, if x_17 were a carpenter, then x_17 is cooking we can infer that for all x_17, x_17 will cook if and only if x_17 is a carpenter. From the fact that for all x_17, x_17 will cook if and only if x_17 is a carpenter, and that for all x_17, x_17 will not cook we can infer that for all x_17, x_17 is not a carpenter. From the fact that for all x_17, x_17 is a taxi driver or x_17 is a carpenter, and that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is not a taxi driver or x_17 will take a plane we can infer that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is a carpenter or x_17 will take a plane. From the fact that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 is a carpenter or x_17 will take a plane, and that for all x_17, x_17 is not a carpenter we can infer that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 will take a plane. Finally, from the fact that for all x_17, x_17 is a writer, and that there is at least one x_17 for which x_17 will take a plane we can infer that some writers will take a plane, which contradicts that For all x_17, either x_17 is a writer or x_17 will take a plane are not true. Therefore, the answer is no.