Consider the following premises. For all x_2, x_2 is an electrician. For all x_2, x_2 will work. For all x_2, if x_2 were an electrician, then x_2 is curious. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: There is at least one x_2 for which x_2 will not work.
 From the fact that for all x_2, if x_2 were an electrician, then x_2 is curious, and that for all x_2, x_2 is an electrician we can infer that for all x_2, x_2 is curious via universal modus ponens. From the fact that for all x_2, x_2 is curious, and that for all x_2, x_2 will work we can infer that for all x_2, x_2 is curious and x_2 will work via universal conjunction. Finally, from the fact that for all x_2, x_2 is curious and x_2 will work we can infer that for all x_2, x_2 is curious via universal simplification, which contradicts that There is at least one x_2 for which x_2 will not work. Therefore, the answer is no.