the fact that there exists something such that if that it is not organicistic is not incorrect then it does not interrupt and it is an afferent does not hold.
sent1: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not non-organicistic is not false then it is both not an interrupt and an afferent. sent2: if something is not organicistic it is an afferent. sent3: if something is organicistic then it is not an interrupt and is an afferent. sent4: if the lepidocrocite is not non-organicistic the fact that it does not interrupt and it is an afferent is not wrong. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not organicistic it does interrupt and it is a kind of an afferent. sent6: if something is not organicistic then it is not a kind of an interrupt and it is an afferent.
sent6 -> int1: the lepidocrocite does not interrupt but it is afferent if it is not organicistic.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there exists something such that if that it is not organicistic is not incorrect then it does not interrupt and it is an afferent does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if the fact that it is not non-organicistic is not false then it is both not an interrupt and an afferent. sent2: if something is not organicistic it is an afferent. sent3: if something is organicistic then it is not an interrupt and is an afferent. sent4: if the lepidocrocite is not non-organicistic the fact that it does not interrupt and it is an afferent is not wrong. sent5: there exists something such that if it is not organicistic it does interrupt and it is a kind of an afferent. sent6: if something is not organicistic then it is not a kind of an interrupt and it is an afferent. ; $proof$ = 
sent6 -> int1: the lepidocrocite does not interrupt but it is afferent if it is not organicistic.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__