Consider the following premises. forall x_6: Q_6(x_6) -> W_3(x_6). R_3(a_5) or q. q -> W_3(a_5). forall x_6: R_3(x_6) -> Q_6(x_6). Can we infer ~W_3(a_5) from them?
 From forall x_6: R_3(x_6) -> Q_6(x_6), forall x_6: Q_6(x_6) -> W_3(x_6) we can infer forall x_6: R_3(x_6) -> W_3(x_6). From forall x_6: R_3(x_6) -> W_3(x_6) we can infer R_3(a_5) -> W_3(a_5). Finally, from R_3(a_5) -> W_3(a_5), q -> W_3(a_5), R_3(a_5) or q we can infer W_3(a_5), which contradicts ~W_3(a_5). Therefore, the answer is no.