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. 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.
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. 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.
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 Nonfalsifiable theories. Logical possible events allow theories to falsify with very narrow escape. The class, subclass potential falsifiers are compared under three categories such as the concept of cardinality, dimension & sub classrelation. 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.” 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.” 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. 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. 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.
Conclusion
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.
References

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