Consider the following premises. For all x_5, if x_5 plays squash, then x_5 is making tea. For all x_5, if x_5 makes tea, then x_5 is a nurse. For all x_5, if x_5 plays tennis, then x_5 is a musician. For all x_5, if x_5 were a nurse, then x_5 is playing tennis. Can we infer the following from them? If we can, name the inference rule being used: There is at least one x_5 for which the fact that x_5 plays squash does not imply that x_5 is a musician.
 From the fact that for all x_5, if x_5 plays squash, then x_5 is making tea, and that for all x_5, if x_5 makes tea, then x_5 is a nurse we can infer that for all x_5, if x_5 plays squash, then x_5 is a nurse via universal transitivity. From the fact that for all x_5, if x_5 were a nurse, then x_5 is playing tennis, and that for all x_5, if x_5 plays tennis, then x_5 is a musician we can infer that for all x_5, if x_5 were a nurse, then x_5 is a musician via universal transitivity. Finally, from the fact that for all x_5, if x_5 plays squash, then x_5 is a nurse, and that for all x_5, if x_5 were a nurse, then x_5 is a musician we can infer that for all x_5, if x_5 plays squash, then x_5 is a musician via universal transitivity, which contradicts that There is at least one x_5 for which the fact that x_5 plays squash does not imply that x_5 is a musician. Therefore, the answer is no.