Author “A” believes Cake is best. Author “B” believes Pie is best. Why would it be beneficial for Author A to discuss Pie in their argument? What could Author A say about Pie that would help the Cake argument
There are a few reasons why it might be beneficial for Author A to discuss Pie in their argument, even though they believe Cake is the best.
1. Establishing credibility: By acknowledging pie as a worthy competitor, Author A shows that they have considered both sides of the argument and have an open mind. This can add credibility to their overall viewpoint on why cake is the best.
2. Addressing counterarguments: By discussing pie, Author A can preemptively address potential counterarguments or doubts that readers may have. They can explain why they believe cake is superior to pie by highlighting the unique qualities, flavors, textures, or experiences that cake offers which pie may lack.
3. Appreciating diversity: Recognizing and appreciating different opinions and tastes can show a sense of inclusiveness and respect for diversity. By discussing pie, Author A can demonstrate that they understand and respect other people's preferences, but ultimately argue why cake still triumphs due to its numerous advantages.
For example, Author A could argue that while pie is delicious and has its own merits, cake offers a wider range of flavors, versatility, and presentation options. They could highlight how cakes can be customized not just in terms of flavors but also shapes, sizes, and decorations, making them suitable for various occasions and celebrations. Additionally, they could discuss the cake's ability to evoke nostalgic memories, its enjoyment as a standalone dessert, or its compatibility to be paired with other sweet options like ice cream or frosting, making it a more well-rounded dessert option overall.
Overall, by discussing pie and elaborating on why cake still prevails, Author A can present a comprehensive argument and solidify their stance on why they believe cake is the best.