write a 250-300 word response. The first half of this response should briefly summarize the documentary, and the second half should detail new information you learned or things that you found particularly interesting.Please start writing after viewing the whole documentary. Documentary link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFGTHtrhtfg
The paper provides a review of the Ape Genius documentary.
The setting begins in a tranquil jungle setting. The narrator gives the description of different chimpanzees that appears on the screen replacing their fear of water with pleasure. And also the representation of the partaking in certain human-like activities, for example, the shaping of projectiles to be utilized in food collection. Jill Pruetz and Andre Whiten (the scientists), key players in this research observe the chimpanzees. Both of them and the narrator start their talk on the discovery that points it clear that the primates are capable of handling more than what we originally thought. A female chimpanzee is seen breaking a branch, chews the end of the branch to make it be sharp for the chimpanzee intended purpose. Afterward, the chimpanzee utilizes the simple tool for skewering a bush infant that hides in a hollow tree.
The Ape Genius documentary is interesting particular when focusing on the abilities of the chimpanzee or primates. After watching the documentary, I got compelled to reconsider my take on the evolution theory of human beings. From history, it is clear that human beings used simple tools to accomplish their targets. The act of the female chimpanzee presented in the documentary can be easily related to what the hunters did in the past. Also, the level of intelligence and organization are depicted. In some scenes, it was fascinating to watch bonobos and chimpanzee overcome the challenges after failed attempts. When the task was so hard, the chimpanzee could ask for help from others to accomplish the task.
To sum up, the documentary portrays the high level of intelligence of some primates but the thesis of comparing them with human beings is not that convincing.