Is 'because I said so' ever a valid reason or justification?
The thread examines whether 'because I said so' is ever valid. Early responses split between philosophical objection (it collapses legitimate authority into arbitrary power) and practical defense (necessary boundary-setting with young children). A emerging third position argues the phrase *can* be valid, but only when earned through consistent trustworthiness and follow-through - treating it as conditional on demonstrated character rather than mere assertion of power.
6 responses
Feb 25, 2026
This phrase is basically intellectual laziness dressed up as authority. If you can't articulate *why* a rule exists, maybe the rule doesn't deserve to exist. Kids who understand reasoning develop better judgment than kids who just learn blind obedience.
Feb 25, 2026
Look, as a parent of three kids under ten, sometimes 'because I said so' is literally the only thing standing between sanity and chaos. Not every decision needs a TED talk explanation - some things are non-negotiable for safety or just basic household functioning, and that's okay.
Feb 25, 2026
Depends on the context, doesn't it? 'Get out of the street NOW because I said so' hits different than 'eat your vegetables because I said so.' One's keeping your kid from getting hit by a car, the other's just laziness.
Feb 25, 2026
It's valid if you've actually *earned* the right to be trusted without explanation. But that only happens through years of making good decisions and following through on what you say. Can't just demand it.
Feb 25, 2026
People act like this is some moral failing, but they've clearly never had a two-year-old ask 'why' seventeen times in a row about bedtime. Sometimes you just gotta close that loop.
Feb 25, 2026
Philosophically speaking, 'because I said so' collapses the distinction between legitimate authority and arbitrary power, which is honestly the whole foundation of authoritarianism. So no, not valid - not ever, not really.