How to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of ancient natural science in China?

It is impossible to write a paper for you, but I can give you some current mainstream views and tips. Strictly speaking, modern science originated from the Renaissance. In the past, there was no science in the strict sense in China and the West.

Science is a system. First, it finds the internal relations of some seemingly unrelated things through unified classification, so both relativity and quantum theory belong to physics. Second, there must be correct and universal research methods (induction, hypothesis proof, deduction, etc.). Thirdly, the primary purpose of science is to explore the source, which makes the current advanced science unable to be directly used and lived. But science is the premise of guiding technology.

So, for ancient China. We can't classify metallurgy and alchemy as chemistry, stargazing as astronomy, and nine chapters of arithmetic as mathematics. These technologies are only the accumulation of experience and are born for practical use. Metallurgy is used for war and sacrifice. An alchemist is immortal, stargazing is divination, and the calendar is agriculture. Our ancestors were very clever. They can sum up some laws carefully, but in the final analysis, they know what they know, which is against natural science.

On the road of development, our ancestors produced the bud of science, but it didn't even become a prototype. This is a drawback of pragmatism, which will be a shortcut to development in the period of low social form and low human cognition. But in today's social and cognitive situation, this will inevitably lead to backwardness.