if the rapper is suburban the fact that the stablemate is a interrupter is not wrong.
sent1: the viper is antimonic if the switchman is not oligarchic and it is not a kind of a soy. sent2: the viper is not non-antimonic if the switchman is oligarchic and not a soy. sent3: if that the rapper is not a kind of a soy is not wrong then that it is both antagonistic and not non-antimonic is not correct. sent4: if the switchman is a kind of non-oligarchic thing that is a kind of a soy the viper is antimonic. sent5: if the switchman is antimonic then the viper is oligarchic. sent6: the fact that the switchman is antimonic hold if it is a soy. sent7: the rapper is arbitrative if it is suburban. sent8: the stablemate is a interrupter if the viper is antimonic. sent9: if that the switchman is a kind of a soy is not incorrect it is antagonistic. sent10: the viper is arbitrative if the rapper is antimonic. sent11: if something is not arbitrative and it is not suburban then it is oligarchic. sent12: the rapper is a kind of a interrupter. sent13: if the rapper is antagonistic it is a interrupter. sent14: something is antagonistic if it is arbitrative. sent15: if the rapper is arbitrative then it is antimonic. sent16: if the switchman is arbitrative then the rapper is oligarchic. sent17: if the rapper is antagonistic then the switchman is a kind of non-oligarchic thing that is not a soy.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the rapper is suburban is not false.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the rapper is arbitrative.; sent14 -> int2: the rapper is antagonistic if it is arbitrative.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the rapper is antagonistic.; int3 & sent17 -> int4: the switchman is non-oligarchic and it is not a soy.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the viper is antimonic.; int5 & sent8 -> int6: the stablemate is a interrupter.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis;
the stablemate is oligarchic.
sent11 -> int7: the fact that the stablemate is oligarchic if the stablemate is not arbitrative and it is not suburban is correct.;
$hypothesis$ = if the rapper is suburban the fact that the stablemate is a interrupter is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: the viper is antimonic if the switchman is not oligarchic and it is not a kind of a soy. sent2: the viper is not non-antimonic if the switchman is oligarchic and not a soy. sent3: if that the rapper is not a kind of a soy is not wrong then that it is both antagonistic and not non-antimonic is not correct. sent4: if the switchman is a kind of non-oligarchic thing that is a kind of a soy the viper is antimonic. sent5: if the switchman is antimonic then the viper is oligarchic. sent6: the fact that the switchman is antimonic hold if it is a soy. sent7: the rapper is arbitrative if it is suburban. sent8: the stablemate is a interrupter if the viper is antimonic. sent9: if that the switchman is a kind of a soy is not incorrect it is antagonistic. sent10: the viper is arbitrative if the rapper is antimonic. sent11: if something is not arbitrative and it is not suburban then it is oligarchic. sent12: the rapper is a kind of a interrupter. sent13: if the rapper is antagonistic it is a interrupter. sent14: something is antagonistic if it is arbitrative. sent15: if the rapper is arbitrative then it is antimonic. sent16: if the switchman is arbitrative then the rapper is oligarchic. sent17: if the rapper is antagonistic then the switchman is a kind of non-oligarchic thing that is not a soy. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the rapper is suburban is not false.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the rapper is arbitrative.; sent14 -> int2: the rapper is antagonistic if it is arbitrative.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the rapper is antagonistic.; int3 & sent17 -> int4: the switchman is non-oligarchic and it is not a soy.; int4 & sent1 -> int5: the viper is antimonic.; int5 & sent8 -> int6: the stablemate is a interrupter.; [assump1] & int6 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__