Periodization of origins

It's easy ____________ the origins of periodization with the periodization of origins. The periodization of origins is ___________ to classify time periods in the distant past for which there is no direct ____________. As stated in _____________ above, any sort of periodization is subject to qualifications and contentions which should not be taken ___________. Periodization of origins has its own challenges apart from, say, a periodization which relies on text, which are _________________ complex.

One tactic for periodization of the distant past, as in Anthropology, is to rely on events, such as _____________ of some tool or the origins of ____________ , which are known to exist, but about which little is known ___________.

XIII. Give the summary of the text.

XIV. Render the text close to its original variant. Unit VII

I. Look through the words and expressions and learn them:

• to sum up under the banner of scientific method – резюмувати під егідою наукового методу;

• contributions to the development – внески в розвиток;

• reasonably – цілком справедливо;

• to guide the evaluation of knowledge – проводити оцінку знання;

• the search for empirical truth – пошук емпіричної істини;

• to overlap – частково співпадати/перекривати;

• meta-level analysis – аналіз на мета-рівні; теоретичний аналіз;

• to be tied to important questions – бути пов’язаним з важливими питаннями;

• to exert great mutual influence – мати великий взаємний вплив

II. Read and translate the text: history of science

Science is a body of empirical and theoretical knowledge, produced by a global community of researchers, making use of specific techniques for the observation and explanation of real phenomena, these techniques are summed up under the banner of scientific method. As such, the history of science draws on the historical methods of both intellectual history and social history. Forms of science first developed from practical concerns and from philosophical investigations of nature.

Though contributions to the development of the scientific method have been made since antiquity, the origin of the modern scientific method is also a complicated subject that is controversial. Ibn al-Haytham (Alhazen) in his Book of Optics recorded important contributions to the development of what would come to be known as science many centuries later. Science is a relatively recent word, whereas for centuries natural philosophers did the work which one might now reasonably call early science. The modern scientific method was not fully developed until the Scientific Revolution, which was initiated by the Scholastic universities of 13th century Europe, and its height during the 16th and early 17th century saw a greater use of the modern scientific method to guide the evaluation of knowledge. The development of the scientific method is considered to be so fundamental that some — especially philosophers of science and practicing scientists — consider earlier inquiries into nature to be pre-scientific. Traditionally, historians of science have defined science sufficiently broadly to include those inquiries.

Mathematics is closely related to, but distinct from science (at least in the modern conception). Technology concerns the creative process of designing useful objects and systems, which differs from the search for empirical truth. Philosophy differs from science in that, while both the natural and the social sciences attempt to base their theories on established fact, philosophy also enquires about other areas of knowledge, notably ethics. In practice, each of these fields is heavily used by the others as an external tool.

The historiography of science is the historical study of the history of science (which often overlaps the history of technology, the history of medicine, and the history of mathematics). It is generally found in an academic context as part of the discipline of the history of science and technology, history and philosophy of science, science studies, and other allied disciplines. The historiography of science is a meta-level analysis of the history of science itself — whereas the history of science is concerned with scientific events, the historiography of science is concerned with the descriptions of scientific events over time.

Since the mid-19th century, ideas about the history of science and technology have been tied to important philosophical and practical questions, such as whether scientific conclusions should be regarded as progressing towards truth, and whether freedom is important for scientific research. Put broadly, the field as a whole examines the entire spectrum of human experience relating to science and technology, and how our understanding of that experience has changed over time. Historiography of science is a much more recent discipline than history of science, although they have exerted great mutual influence on each other, through the study of theories, changes in theories, disciplinary and institutional history, the cultural, economic, and political impacts of science and technology, and the impact of society on scientific practice itself.