Jakob Engel-Schmidt proposed an initiative to legally acknowledge gastronomy as an art, rather than how it is currently recognized as a craft. As Denmark's Culture Minister, Schmidt is responsible for national cultural policy decisions such as this one. Denmark has made tremendous culinary strides in recent years with the advancement of gastronomy, and has become a world renowned culinary hub. By elevating gastronomy's status within the country to that of a fine art, Schmidt hopes Denmark can maintain it's culinary prestige. Referring to the policy, he expressed:

"When we experience gastronomy at the very highest level, it is much more than food. It is art. Denmark is a cornucopia of world-class gastronomy. That is why it makes sense to examine whether we can recognize gastronomy for what it is: an art form."

One strength within Schmidt's argument is that he specifically focuses on calling gastronomy an art rather than cooking as a whole, avoiding an overgeneralization. Cooking comes in many forms and can serve a wide range of purposes, so it may not always involve artistic intention. In contrast, gastronomic dishes are designed to be visually striking and thought provoking. By narrowing his claim, Schmidt presents a more precise argument about gastronomy that avoids engaging with a broader, widely debated controversy of whether all cooking can be considered an art form. 

With that being said, a weakness within Schmidt's argument is that he does not explain why world-class gastronomy should be recognized as an art, other than it being "much more than food". Particularly for individuals who have never had a gastronomic experience, it would be beneficial for Schmidt to outline the specific characteristics he believes elevate gastronomy to this artistic classification. Otherwise, he has no true evidence for his claims.

Rasmus Munk is a widely celebrated Danish chef known for his experimental approach to cooking.  He owns the "avant-garde" restaurant Alchemist in Copenhagen, Denmark, which organized the Convergence symposium. Following Jakob-Engel Schmidt's announcement of the initiative, Munk responded in a Facebook post. He wrote:

"I believe food can become art through intention, transformation, communication, and context. Yet chefs pushing boundaries are often limited by a system that frames gastronomy solely as craft, shaped by commercial constraints, and leaving too little room for research and reflection."

There are strengths to Munk's argument that are worth acknowledging. First of all, he highlights specific circumstances–intention, transformation, communication, and context–under which he thinks food can become art. Munk doesn't try to define what is art and what is not, but instead emphasizes that it is circumstantial. This is more powerful than broadly stating that food is art because the nuances of his argument is harder to dismiss. Furthermore, another strength is that he points out structural issues within the culinary industry that prevent chef's from "pushing boundaries". This shows that the problem is not just about a definition, but about a systematic limit to innovation. 

His argument implies that Jakob Engel-Schmidt's initiative to reclassify gastronomy as a fine art will address these constraints, giving chef's the institutional support and financial resources needed to elevate their work and pursue greater creativity. However, this implication also presents a weakness in his argument. Munk assumes that such reclassification will directly enable greater expressive freedom for chef's. He does not acknowledge that this outcome is not a guarantee, and that there may be other solutions to the problem.

Holger Dahl is an architecture critic for the daily Danish national newspaper, Berlingske. Dahl and several other stakeholders in the Danish art world are worried that reclassifying gastronomy as an art will lead to chef's stealing finances from more established categories of art, such as architecture. When commenting on the initiative, he said:

“I think it’s quite silly, there’s no use, it doesn’t make any sense. It’s a little bit like a bicycle and a car — they have round wheels, they’ll take you from one point to another point, but it’s not like a very good bicycle all of a sudden turns into a car. It doesn’t happen.”

Dahl uses an analogy to illustrate what he believes is a fundamental issue with Jakob Engel-Schmidt's proposed initiative, which is a strength in his argument. By likening the reclassification of gastronomy to a bicycle turning into a car, he simplifies a complicated controversy to an everyday, concrete comparison. This makes his argument easier to understand. The analogy suggests that just as bikes do not simply become cars, cooking cannot just become an art. Furthermore, even when two things share similar characteristics–like bicycles and cars, and cooking and art–that does not mean that they belong in the same category. The emphasis of these categorical differences is another strength within Holger Dahl's argument.

A weakness in Dahl's argument is that he makes his point by comparing things that are completely irrelevant to each other. Gastronomy and art are not the same as bicycles and cars. Vehicles like this have concrete, agreed upon standards while the definition of and art and gastronomy are more fluid and circumstantial. Therefore, his analogy oversimplifies a multifaceted debate. Dahl also uses emotionally charged language, which is another weakness in his argument. He declares that the initiative to reclassify gastronomy as an art is silly, useless, and senseless. This language replaces explanation, and makes his argument sound more dismissive than articulate.