सांसे करती बयाँ ज़िन्दगी,

रुके तो थमे बन्द-ऐ-ज़िन्दगी।


अदब है ज़नाब क्या?

थोड़ा घूमना और थोड़ा बहना।

चाहे हो समय का या इंसान का।


प्यार बनती कभी बन्दगी,

कभी बनाती काँटों भरी तिष्नगी।


अदब है ज़नाब क्या?

थोड़ा समझना और थोड़ा समझाना।

ना जाने फिर भी होता क्यों शर्माना।


सांसे जब नई करती तिष्नगी,

फिर काहे की शर्मिंदगी?


अदब है ज़नाब दरियादिली।

बस दिखना और दिखाना चाहिए,

तभी बनते बन्द-ऐ-ज़िन्दगी।


तुम्हारी बातें

तुम्हारी बातें।
ना सांस लेने देती है,
और न ही थमने देती है,
कभी बुलाती, तो कभी सुलाती।
कितना भी सोचा हमेशा पागल बनाती।
तुम्हारी बातें।
बिना बोलें सब कह जाती,
बेवजह इंतन्हा कर जाती,
कभी रातों को दिन सा बनाती।
तो कभी दिन में ही खोने पर मजबूर करती।
तुम्हारी बातें।
हमेशा हर पल कुछ नया ऐहसास दिलाती,
चाहें कोई हो अज़नबी या, अज्ञानी।
हर किसी को बनाती अपनी दीवानी।
पर जब खिलता चाँद दरिया तीरे
हर एक खिंचा चला आता धिरे-धीरे।

तुम्हारी बातें।
रोते को हँसाते, हर एक को मुस्काते।
जब आते दरिया और पुरवैया की सौगाते।
खो जाती दुनियां जैसे चाँद सितारोँ में।
चन्द मिनट बदलते घँटों में।
तुम्हारी बातें।।

बदली दिल्ली

लगता है खोया है,
अपना मिज़ाज़,बनकर
किसी का हिज़ाब, न चाहकर
छुपाया अपना चेहरा इधर-उधर।
लगता है खोया-खोया बनकर कहर।
न समझ आया आबो-हवा,
न समझ आया शर्म -हया,
सब छुपे थे बनकर दर्द-ए-बेसहन।
मानो सबने रखा था कफ़न,
किया था किसी ने ऐसा चुभन,
न समझ आया आबो-हवा।
बदली थी हर एक मंज़र,
बनकर एक खंज़र,
लगा जैसे होगा असर,
बनकर खँडहर-सा हसर।
जिसे देखा, सब थे बेखबर।
लगा सब थे इसमे भागीदार।
बेबस था ये शहर जैसे अपना जागीरदार।।

Summer School Experience

Individually we came.
Time spent, sober we became.
Learning wreath made us same.
Inequality or, development lame.
Krishna initiated summer’s fever.
Arora twisted the flavor like ever.
Everyone turned to group of three.
It ain’t make things to be free!
Fun turned Phil to Philomena.
Everyday’s pill became to chill.
Be it mountain climbing deal,
Or cycling in Aravali hills to seal.
Nothing became upheaval.
Suddenly happened rural field medieval.
Saw development’s up & down archival.
Everything turned development things.
Be it people or choices, scarcity prevailed.
Women were hit the most, like choked!
Unlike the caged parrots & tigers.
Even if they wish to roar, silent&unheard.
Still the happiness prevailed.
This Summer learned the unlearn life.
Changed the belief like 360 degree rife!!


My TISS Experience

Dear all something worth sharing about my alma matter’s experience. Hope you all love the aspiration about the experience i had in the past.

by Deepak Kumar

It was last winter of 2016; I decided to be part of Tata Institute of Social sciences (TISS), Mumbai. I had never heard about it so far in my entire life. I appeared for the entrance exam, cleared it. I proceeded further for my interview and later on, I got selected out of a pool of competing students in India.

The experience so far was amazing, filled with excitement at all levels. The excitement became challenge once I came to the financial capital of India (Mumbai) from the Capital city of India (Delhi). The first challenge was to search for an accommodation, as TISS is a small campus and doesn’t provide hostel rooms to all students. It became too challenging to survive especially in the month of July. As this month is known for a rainy season, both in India in general and particularly in Western India, i.e…

View original post 665 more words

Traveling Year 2o16

As the year is ending today midnight. I just wanted to thank you all who were behind my every act to guide, support, teach & update me this entire year. As we are entering another year 2017, I will need you all’s presence same way. Before this year sets to the history for all us, let me revisit this year quickly which made my life’s history in-front of you all. After travelling more than 22,000 Km of India’s Northern, Southern, Eastern and Western parts; I learnt many terrains of India beyond books such as coastal, hilly, plain, plateau, western ghats, Himalayas and of course don’t forget Mumbai’s rain which was not less than MAWSYNRAM (World’s wettest place) for me 😛  Thanks to this place i found myself as a poet. Hope to discover much more of India next year too.
The beginning of this year brought many good results for me by giving me the opportunity to present 4 Research papers at Amity University Noida, Punjabi University, Patiala, Pondicherry university, Pondicherry & Central university of Jharkhand, Ranchi.
Visited campuses of more than 10 universities in India and inter-acted with 1000+ students on various subjects. Leaving one’s home like New Delhi wasn’t easy for me but i have to leave as i didn’t have any better way to say good luck to my life’s new opportunity.
Though i have regrets of two things for this year which made me to write this message to all of you-
1. I couldn’t get admission in JNU, Delhi and IIT, Bombay after clearing Interview for both.
2. I couldn’t visit Bhutan after reaching just on the gate of Bhutan thanks to “Demonetization
Hope you all do great next year to make each and every one next to you happy, prosperous without giving pain of complain, ego, ill-will and wicked practices. I know it’s too much but still at-least try 🙂 🙂 Happiness is a journey which starts from small act of us. Let’s do for better India & World alike. Happy New Year 2017

The logic of Scientific Discovery

Karl Popper in his book The Logic of Scientific Discovery talked about the basics of the Logic of science, structural components of theory building. Further he has elaborated on the testability, falsifiability, universality of statement, theory etc. The book is divided into two parts- in the first part he talked about logical experiments of science and in the second he talked about structure building of theory. The book Logic of Scientific Discovery is divided into 10 chapters. This book deals with the range of topics like scientific logic, induction, deduction, pyschologism, demarcation, epistemology, tautology etc. The problem of induction is solved in empirical sciences with the help of facts, which is simply inductive methods. A scientist engaged in a research work and bring those research based on test, verifies it, justifies it and it become a theory. It is the question which kept on tested in the form of hypothesis, inductive reasoning and later inferences supports it. As universal statements are known for it’s universality so is science. Whatever is true in one part of the world is also true in the another part of world too. Popper argued these statements are known based on the experience of over a time period. He even further argued this based on the natural laws and justifies it by bringing inductive inferences which is logically true and justified. This is also strengthened by Reichenbach’s truth of scientific theory.1 All the inductive inferences are logical principle and tautological in nature which is deductive logic. This statement of induction and logic is further argued based on the Hume’s work, which is principle of induction as a universal statement. Kant’s principle of induction based on principle of causation has also been taken into consideration. But it’s Reichenbach’s principle which is nothing but truth. Science is also nothing but the truth.

The logic of reliability of statement comes from probability. It has upper and lower limits as truth and falsity. This way the logic of probable inference or probability logic derives the scientific truth. It is rational reconstruction of scientific test which bring the truth as discovery of theory. The epistemological study brings inductive logic, and it rejects falsifiability. The proposal should based on the asymmetry between verifiability and falsifiability and this asymmetry derives logic of universal statement. The statement is singular but means as universal. In the philosophical derivation scientific objective and subjective conviction plays an important role. As Kant argued objective knowledge of science needs to be justified. Subjective as per Kant is feeling of varying degrees i.e. conviction. It needs to be examined with the construction of theories with the use of hypotheses and universal statements. The epistemology is based on scientific logic and this logic is full of choice of methods. Based on the tests, the falsifiability derives logic. This is how positivists see based on empirical science. Wittgenstein used unassailable and definitive to define philosophical problems.2

In sciences everything is knowledge. This knowledge is tested, verified, with logic. This becomes base of theory. The theory is based on causality, explanation and premises of deduction with universal laws keeping in mind the singular statement’s initial condition. The singular statement and universal statement become the principle of causality, which is further interpreted based on tautological (analytic) and reality (synthetic). Universal and individual concepts are also considered while theory is being made. In the same way strictly universal and existential statements are tested, altered, observed and demarcated. Theories are axiomatized statements which are free from contradictions and in a sense they don’t have superfluous assumptions. In scientific methods, a theory is tested based on range of possibilities and interpreted accordingly such as on values, variables, models etc. A theory needs a critical discussion based on methods which is called as conventionalism. It is also tested on the falsifiability nature of methods and properties. There are conventionalist view and Kant’s Idealism view. These looks the logical investigation, falsifiability and falsification, consistency etc.

In the problem of the empirical basis the singular statements are observed based on psychologism. This has troubled thinkers like Fries.3 Fries argues that if statement of science are not considered severely then one must be able to justify it. Pyschologism even called as protocol sentences by Neurath and Carnap in modern theory of empirical basis.4

In degree of testability, theories are tested whether it is right or wrong. Here theories are required to be tested in an absolute sense between falsifiable and Non-falsifiable theories. Logical possible events allow theories to falsify with very narrow escape. The class, sub-class potential falsifiers are compared under three categories such as the concept of cardinality, dimension & sub class-relation. It is universality level and degree of precision which deduce the theory in a falsifiable manner. Concept of range helps in handling degree of precision measurement. If a theory attains higher degree of testability, theory is possible. A theory is further tested in a whole lot ranges of dimensions such as set of curves in zero, one, two, three, four dimensional. Here it is compared and falsified to elucidate epistemological questions. If it passes simply based on probability of hypotheses.

Theory should be simple, understandable which depicts problems simply. As weyl said “the problem of simplicity is of central importance for the epistemology of the natural sciences.”5 In scientific testing of theory, one needs to test it based on the mathematical representation too. Even poincare in conventional method argued for choice of theory. Schlick argues the possibilities of defining the concept of law and chance with the help of concept of simplicity. Wittgenstein argued “ the process of induction consists in assuming the simplest law that can be made to harmonize with our experience.”6 In scientific term simplicity is not only a simple concept but a set of universal principle’s tests into various forms, shape, size and functions. It helps the hypothesis strengthening with various methods and flexibility of it.

The probability of various events, certainty of occurring chances varies with different tendencies what popper argued in the same book. It has been related with game theory and probabilistic laws of physics etc. There are various ideas, choices, arguments, procedures which happens with experience. These should be considered while making the hypotheses relevance. The chance of happening particular things like objective and subjective deduction, inferences etc derived from probability. It is scientifically tested and argued in the mathematical way to reach a positive conclusion. It is probability which reaches argument to its logical conclusion based on various events with common sense, logic and frequency of happenings. It is interpreted differently by different needs of the hypothesis. The fundamental of any argument is depicted on the chances of probable outcomes. These are based on selection, insensitiveness and irrelevance of hypotheses proposals. Philosophically numbers of events, chances of outcomes, freedom of finite and sequence helped to elaborate more on the theory building. The idea of causality and effects help in building a deductive probable arguments pf hypotheses. Hypothetical estimates gives equal chances to equally derivable and explorable in inductive base. The problem of decidability is related with probability. This further helps in inducing, bringing new arguments into a concrete logical conclusion. Probability helps in bringing metaphysics in a speculative way which estimates systems falsifiability. Some philosophers of probability like Bolzano, von Kries and Waismann argued to bring calculus of problems to logical ranges which is nothing but system of measurement for ranges. This helps in bridging the gap in subjective and objective issues. Popper has even argued many things from principles of quantum mechanics such as Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. This is in terms to relate how a singular probabilistic statement helps in deriving conclusion in statistical way. New formalism helps in calculating senseless or metaphysical path.

Corroboration is a technique which test a theory and updates it according to the previous experience with new one. Hence the values which earlier couldn’t assimilated just updated in the current experiment of theory or hypotheses which lead to a new theory. It helps those theory to adjust with new one. Hence the probability logic and degree of probability helps in bringing previous experiment scientifically a new height. The role of induction is again comes into a Saviour to test the hypotheses with variable flexibility. Corroboration brings the criticism of previous work to update and add a new dimension to a theory in a new way. It is inductive logic which derive the connotation to derive a new conclusion as a perspective of newness. Hence the truth of previous session of experiments in scientific terms did not get waste. At the same time it is updated to new rig our, new ethics in a best possible way. Reichenbach used this in natural sciences to assimilate in philosophical terms.7 In a hypothesis a sequence is added to a probable chance to reach theory a particular conclusion. In a way the hypothesis become neither verifiable nor falsifiable as it logically updated. It is a kind of universal statement in itself. The degree of validity in analogy increases. The naturalistic view asserts about a probable outcome which is in definite sense as per schrödinger’s theory in tautological sense. A theory’s fundamental relation i.e. compatibility and incompatibility attribute to a positive degree. The compatibility of theory helps in corroboration in a positive and best sense. It is experience of knowledge which helps and saves the track of idea and observation in a great sense. It is logical probability which helps in linking events in the concept of corroboration directly and indirectly. It is probability of hypothesis which generalizes the contrast character of hypothesis to degree of corroboration which Keynes argued in it’s probability of hypothesis.8 Corroboration is not truth value but on par with the concept of true and false which is logically derivable from various basic sets of statements. It is path of science in epistemological aspects which adapts the method of production. It is science which never aims in illusion of knowledge but rather believe in discovery of logic, deeper sense, rig our of tests which is close to objective sense not subjective sense.


The Logic of Scientific Discovery is a book published originally in German to go deeper into research of Natural sciences. It talks on philosophical methods, how to derive, test, falsifies etc. It helped researcher to understand a statement in best possible way to induce, deduce, inference, use probability, hypothesis building and derive a connotation in a way to logical conclusion. One always try to bring rig our into test, experiment, experience a broad range of methods. It helps them to know the argument in a positive sense with the help of logical argument based on objective of research or subjective of the research. It is nothing but a experiment collaborated in a best way to experience philosophically, scientifically to justify. After reading this original book I came to understand is- one should always propose hypothesis keeping in mind what the outcome is going to come, depends on the work’s assumption in the objective of research. Hence it is one’s effort with dedication to do research in best possible way depends only on the flaws of arguments based on the logic, inferences one made, assume, derive etc.

As a researcher, one’s prime duty is to look the best of things in terms of literature available and relate it to the current hypotheses. This is is called corroboration, which derives universality, positivity, logical argument, scientific rig our. The cause and effect is always attached to the hypotheses which takes the research in a way to reach a logical, valid argument and in the last a better theory. This is all possible because the science derives the thing in a connotation of question, logic, positivism, epistemological way. A theory always become better and better because it is tested, falsified, tested with the possible values, judgment. Hence it is this concept of science matters which helps everything to relate and corroborate with existed theory to current one. The logic, science, episteme, prove the concept in itself to give an outcome best possible one. The philosophical arguments should be connotation of various possible arguments in a scientific logic.

In the last, the book, The Logic of Scientific Discovery gives the best of truth, values, assumptions based on the scientific, positive, and valid connotation. Hence the logic is clear, so the outcome will be also greater and best.


  1. Popper, Karl, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Harper & Row Publishers, New York, 1958

1H. Reichenbach, Erkenntnis I, 1930, p.186

2Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, proposition 6.53.

3J.F.. Fries, Neue order anthropologische kritik der Vernunft (1828 to 1831)

4Carnap, Erkenntnis 2, 1932, p.432

5Cf. Weyl, op.cit.,p 115 f.;English edition

6Wittgenstein, op.cit, proposition 5.454I

7Reichenbach, Wahrscheinlichkeitslogik (op.. cit. p.488), p.15 of the reprint.

8Keynes, A treatise on probability (1921), pp. 224