Consider the following premises. For all x_14, x_14 will not read a book. For all x_14, if x_14 plays squash, then x_14 is playing tennis. For all x_14, if x_14 works, then x_14 is reading a book. For all x_14, if x_14 plays tennis, then x_14 is playing squash. There is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will play tennis if and only if x_14 will work. For all x_14, if x_14 reads a book, then x_14 is working. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will not play squash.
 From the fact that for all x_14, if x_14 reads a book, then x_14 is working, and that for all x_14, if x_14 works, then x_14 is reading a book we can infer that for all x_14, x_14 will read a book if and only if x_14 will work. From the fact that for all x_14, x_14 will read a book if and only if x_14 will work, and that for all x_14, x_14 will not read a book we can infer that for all x_14, x_14 will not work. From the fact that for all x_14, if x_14 plays tennis, then x_14 is playing squash, and that for all x_14, if x_14 plays squash, then x_14 is playing tennis we can infer that for all x_14, x_14 will play tennis if and only if x_14 will play squash. From the fact that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will play tennis if and only if x_14 will work, and that for all x_14, x_14 will not work we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will not play tennis. Finally, from the fact that for all x_14, x_14 will play tennis if and only if x_14 will play squash, and that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will not play tennis we can infer that there is at least one x_14 for which x_14 will not play squash. Therefore, the answer is yes.