This article discusses what I see as problems in the previous and current scholarship on traditional Chinese science. It begins with the discussion of [the so-called "why-not" question—"Why did modern science not develop independently in China?"—and goes on to identify some problems associated with it. One problem is the assumption, held most notably by Joseph Needham, that there is a single developmental pattern for all the sciences in all the cultures to follow. Another is the recent over-emphasis on the detailed studies of technical scientific texts. After discussing these two problems and their consequences, I indicate some other aspects of Chinese science and culture that can be fruitfully studied. The article ends with suggestion of ways to ask the "why-not" question more meaningfully.