For any truth table, there are many logical expressions that have that truth table. We give a simple mechanical method for producing such an expression. The main disadvantage is that in general, the expression so obtained is quite a bit longer than necessary.
Look at all the entries that give truth value $T$. The first one is $TTT$. Write down $P\land Q\land R$.
The next one is $TFT$. Write down $P\land \lnot Q\land R$.
The next one is $TFF$. Write down $P\land \lnot Q\land \lnot R$.
Continue, one for every combination of truth values that yields $T$. The remaining two are $FTT$ and $FFF$. Write down the appropriate conjunctions.
Put $\lor$'s between all the things you wrote down. We get the expression
$$(P\land Q\land R)\lor (P\land \lnot Q\land R)\lor (P\land \lnot Q\land \lnot R) \lor (\lnot P\land Q\land R)\lor (\lnot P\land \lnot Q\land \lnot R) .$$
A little thinking shows why this gives the right truth table. It certainly gives $T$ at the right places. And at the places where the truth table yielded $F$, everyone of the conjunctions that were $\lor$-ed is false.
The above procedure gives us what is called the full disjunctive normal form (DNF). This form may be quite inefficient. There are good algorithms for simplifying a DNF to use a much smaller number of connectives. This minimization process is an important part of circuit design.
We can also do some hand-optimization. For example, note that there are only $3$ combinations that give the value $F$, as against $5$ that give the value $T$. So write down the disjunctive normal form we would get if the $F$ and $T$ in the last column had been switched, put an $\lnot$ in front. and use De Morgan's Laws to simplify. We will get a conjunctive normal form that is simpler than the DNF we got. There are many other tricks/methods.