If the rule had said "replace not(F -> G) with not F or G" instead, the not would have been removed.
If I understood correctly, the parentheses make quite a difference?
The ¬ ("not") would have been removed outside the parentheses, but, a ¬ ("not") would have been added to the "s" inside the parentheses.
So, ¬(S -> R) becomes (¬S -> R) with the above rule ^?
This post has been edited by TechSyndrome: 12 July 2012 - 10:46 AM