Consider the following premises. For all x_9, if x_9 were a poet, then x_9 is playing tennis. For all x_9, if x_9 were an artist, then x_9 is playing tennis. For all x_9, x_9 is a poet. For all x_9, if x_9 plays tennis, then x_9 is an artist. Can we infer the following from them? There is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is not an artist.
 From the fact that for all x_9, if x_9 plays tennis, then x_9 is an artist, and that for all x_9, if x_9 were an artist, then x_9 is playing tennis we can infer that for all x_9, x_9 will play tennis if and only if x_9 is an artist. From the fact that for all x_9, x_9 will play tennis if and only if x_9 is an artist we can infer that for all x_9, if x_9 plays tennis, then x_9 is an artist. From the fact that for all x_9, if x_9 were a poet, then x_9 is playing tennis, and that for all x_9, if x_9 plays tennis, then x_9 is an artist we can infer that for all x_9, if x_9 were a poet, then x_9 is an artist. Finally, from the fact that for all x_9, if x_9 were a poet, then x_9 is an artist, and that for all x_9, x_9 is a poet we can infer that for all x_9, x_9 is an artist, which contradicts that There is at least one x_9 for which x_9 is not an artist. Therefore, the answer is no.