In everyday life, we often use the terms justify and explain interchangeably, as if they were completely interchangeable. However, confusing their meaning often leads to misunderstandings, unnecessary conflicts, biases in attributing causes, and even problems with emotional self-regulation. Conversely, understanding the difference between explaining and justifying helps us mature, communicate better, and even live more clearly.
To explain is to shed light
When we explain, we provide information about the causes of something. We try to shed light on the topic so others can understand it. In fact, etymologically, this word comes from the Latin explicàre , which literally means to unfold something folded. Therefore, the explanation usually includes:
- Verifiable facts
- Precise details of what happened
- Logical reasons to support our claims or actions
It’s a way to facilitate understanding of the facts without evaluating them as good or bad. We’re not trying to convince, just to help the listener understand the logic of what happened, our position, or our reasoning.
The explanation focuses on the what and the why, without necessarily implying a moral or emotional assessment. For example, when we say, “I was late because there was an accident on the road,” we explain what happened and its cause. We don’t add any judgment.
To justify is to seek validation
Justify, on the other hand, comes from the Latin justificàre, which means to demonstrate that something is just. Therefore, it usually includes a defensive component and a moral judgment. It involves defending or excusing an action, often seeking to lessen the responsibility or negative judgment that might result from it.
Justification is an attempt to legitimize an action, usually to reduce guilt, social rejection, or cognitive dissonance. When we justify ourselves, we seek validation from others.
We generally look for arguments or reasons to support our position, decisions, or behaviors to avoid negative consequences or judgments as much as possible. Therefore, justification often includes:
- Subjective or emotional interpretations of what happened
- Focus on external factors to minimize liability
- Resorting to mitigating circumstances or “buts” to reduce guilt
- Emphasis on positive results to justify the means
The justification seeks to relieve us of our share of responsibility, so it might sound like: “It’s not my fault there’s always traffic in this city. No one can arrive on time in this chaos.”
The 3 most important differences between explaining and justifying
Although explaining and justifying may seem similar on the surface, they ultimately respond to very different psychological motivations. Recognizing the differences will allow you to greatly improve your communication with others and your relationship with yourself.
1. Intention vs. cause
- Explaining focuses on objective causes with the intention of providing clarity.
- Justifying seeks to influence another’s perception and judgment, often to avoid negative consequences.
2. Internal vs. external attribution
- Explanations can be both internal causes (“I didn’t study enough”) and external causes (“the exam was very difficult” ).
- Justifications often shift responsibility (“I didn’t pass because the teacher didn’t explain well” ).
3. Emotional vs. cognitive function
- Explaining seeks understanding primarily at a cognitive level.
- Justifying seeks validation on an emotional and moral level.
The self-justification bias and the lies we tell ourselves
We all make mistakes. And we also try to justify them. We’re driven by what’s known as cognitive dissonance. Our brain seeks consistency, so when our actions and decisions aren’t aligned with our values, beliefs, or self-image, we experience internal psychological tension.
The self-justification bias helps us reduce the dissonance and anxiety we feel by preserving our image and protecting our ego. To reduce this internal discomfort, we tend to justify what we did, even though deep down we know it wasn’t the best choice.
This bias allows us to rationalize our decisions and justify our behavior to reduce the feeling that we have done something wrong or inappropriate, which helps us preserve our positive self-image.
When our actions conflict with our values, we tend to justify them to reduce discomfort. This can lead us to believe we’re “explaining” when we’re actually justifying our position.
For example, a parent who yells at their child might justify it by saying, “He just doesn’t listen to me any other way.” Instead of simply explaining, “I lost control because I was stressed.”
This means that in many cases the justification is not only for those who listen to us, but also for ourselves, protecting us from the feeling that we are acting inconsistently.
Obviously, this mechanism can temporarily relieve emotional discomfort or even help us escape our responsibilities. However, in the long term, it can become a hindrance to personal growth.
In fact, one of the most insidious dangers of justification is that it can become a sophisticated form of self-deception. By continually justifying our mistakes, attitudes, or poor decisions, we avoid the discomfort of change. We become trapped in narratives that comfort us, but also limit us.
Learning to explain without justifying, an art that is trained
Explaining without justifying is an act of emotional honesty. It means looking at ourselves clearly, recognizing our limits without judgment, and communicating responsibly, without defensiveness. To achieve this, we must begin by differentiating between explanation and justification.
- Ask yourself: Am I seeking understanding or forgiveness?
A quick way to identify whether you’re explaining or justifying is to analyze your intention. If your goal is for others to understand the reasons behind your action, you’re explaining (“I did this because…” ). On the other hand, if you’re seeking to soften a mistake, avoid consequences, escape responsibility, or be “forgiven,” you’re justifying (“I did this, but…” ).
- Analyze if there is a defensive emotional charge
Justifications often come with a self-defensive tone , as if you’re preparing an argument for an imaginary trial. Words like “but ,” “although,” or “the fact is” are clear signs that you’re rationalizing rather than reporting. If you feel like you’re arguing rather than describing, you’re probably justifying yourself.
- Use the third person method
A powerful trick for detecting justifications is to imagine someone else recounting your exact situation. Does it sound like a reasonable explanation or a lame excuse? What part rings true and what part sounds like an excuse? Does it seem like they’re protecting themselves or genuinely trying to get you to understand? This technique helps you gain emotional distance, eliminating self-deception and allowing you to be more honest with yourself.
Finally, remember that a big difference between explaining and justifying is that the former provides context, but it doesn’t eliminate responsibility. You can say, “I had a really rough week, and I still shouldn’t have spoken to you like that.” Sometimes, letting go of the excuses is the first step toward becoming who we really want to be.
Leave a Reply