Well it's like saying that given that arrays can contain any type of data, why not have everything be an array, and just make one-lenghted arrays if you need only one variable. Similarly, you can do with a method everything you can with a function, but the reverse is not true and when you only need a function, better just create a function.
If you write a dummy "Print" function, you probably don't need any object for that. Then use a function, not a method. Functions inside types are no different. Functions inside types work just like function outside types, you are just given the ability to put them inside the type, which provides a separate namespace (MyType1.Print and MyType2.Print won't collide). So by exampleif you have a simple function that you plan to use from inside methods of the types (or in the context of using objects of these types), then naturally you'll put them inside the type.
I guess this "namespace" issue answers your question.
If you write a dummy "Print" function, you probably don't need any object for that. Then use a function, not a method. Functions inside types are no different. Functions inside types work just like function outside types, you are just given the ability to put them inside the type, which provides a separate namespace (MyType1.Print and MyType2.Print won't collide). So by exampleif you have a simple function that you plan to use from inside methods of the types (or in the context of using objects of these types), then naturally you'll put them inside the type.
I guess this "namespace" issue answers your question.