On The Pope's Law Concept

Karl Popper gave some primary explanations about the law in 1934, and they are:l) the characterization of laws is strictly universal statements;2)the law is a ban. which can be experienced in the actual word;(3) the law is true in all spaces and times;4)the law is regularity of repetitions of the matter of the actual word; So his law view is the regularity view in this age. Ernest Nagel suggested that the characterization of laws as strictly universal statements is insufficient. By analyzing law, I suggest that the characterization of laws as strictly universal statements is unnecessary. That the characterization of laws as strictly universal statements is unnecessary is badly endangering his falsificationism Popper accepted a criticism that was gave by W.Kneale. He thought the natural necessity is an essence of matter, which is expressed by the laws. So Kneale gave the necessitarian explanation about the law, and his the necessitarian view is ontological. The natural necessity is an expression of the structure of matter that it is ontological assumption, which is a structure view about the law. The structure approach has some trouble in some aspects, such as the initial conditions the definition of natural necessity . possible worlds. Some philosophers attempted to get rid of Popper's these trouble, and some of them didn't solve these problems, but them gave some good guides for research of the law. Igor Hanzel made some good attempt to solve Popper's problems by statement of initial condition and reconstruction of possible worlds. According to Popper's regularity view in 1934, he explained the historical law .He asserted that there is not law in history because of the following ideas: 1) historical affairs cannot be repeated;2) historical affairs cannot be verified;3) tendency(propensity) in history is not law;4)history cannot be predicted. Acoording to his criticism on the theories of induction along with his propensity explanation in probability after 1959,1 asserted the follow assertions :1) the repe ition is similarity in someone's mind;2)the basic statements is beyond experience;3)the structure of matter is kind of propensity. So the assertions have almost overthrown all the critical proof of the view that there is not law in history, then his view that there is not law in history naturally collapsed, but he still insisted on his view above during all his life. Popper have different law criterions in scientific law and historical law is a serious limitation of his idea.