Mistakes were made (but not by me)

When we cross these lines, we are justifying behavior that we know is wrong precisely so that we can continue to see ourselves as honest people and not criminals or thieves

In a rift, no one is going to admit that they lied or stole or cheated without provocation; only a bad person would do that, just as only a heartless child would abandon a parent in need. Therefore, each side justifies its own position by claiming that the other side is to blame; each is simply responding to the offense or provocation as any reasonable, moral person would do.

Thus far in this book we have been talking about situations in which mistakes were definitely made—memory distortions, wrongful convictions, misguided therapeutic practices. We move now to the far more brambly territory of betrayals, rifts, and violent hostilities.

Implicit theories have powerful consequences because they affect, among other things, how couples argue, and even the very purpose of an argument. If a couple is arguing from the premise that each is a good person who did something wrong but fixable, or who did something blunderheaded because of momentary situational pressures, there is hope of correction and compromise. But, once again, unhappy couples invert this premise. Because each partner is expert at self-justification, they each blame the other’s unwillingness to change on personality flaws, but excuse their own unwillingness to change on the basis of their personality virtues.

Successful partners extend to each other the same self-forgiving ways of thinking we extend to ourselves: They forgive each other’s missteps as being due to the situation, but give each other credit for the thoughtful and loving things they do. If one partner does something thoughtless or is in a crabby mood, the other tends to write it off as a result of events that aren’t the partner’s fault: “Poor guy, he is under a lot of stress”; “I can understand why she snapped at me; she’s been living with back pain for days.” But if one does something especially nice, the other credits the partner’s inherent good nature and sweet personality: “My honey brought me flowers for no reason at all,” a wife might say; “he is the dearest guy.”

and thus they selectively remember parts of their life, focusing on those parts that support their own points of view.”

The trouble is that once people develop an implicit theory, the confirmation bias kicks in and they stop seeing evidence that doesn’t fit it.

Self-justification is blocking each partner from asking: Could I be wrong? Could I be making a mistake? Could I change?

Frank and Debra’s evening with the new couple might have ended very differently if each of them had not been so busy spinning their own self-justifications and blaming the other, and had thought about the other’s feelings first. Each of them understands the other’s point of view perfectly, but their need for self-justification is preventing them from accepting their partner’s position as being as legitimate as their own.

Successful couples have conflicts and get angry, just as unhappy couples do. But happy couples know how to manage their conflicts. If a problem is annoying them, they either talk and fix the problem, let it go, or learn to live with it.3 Unhappy couples are pulled further apart by angry confrontations. When Frank and Debra get into a quarrel, they retreat to their familiar positions, brood, and stop listening to each other. If they do listen, they don’t hear. Their attitude is: “Yeah, yeah, I know how you feel about this, but I’m not going to change because I’m right.”