These defenses can be categorized into two major groups: justifications such as privilege and self-defense, and excuses such as intoxication. Justification permits a distinction between causing harm and wrongdoing and reflects social approval based on shared social interests or shared moral beliefs. Conversely, excused behavior is not approved. It is viewed as wrong and morally blameworthy. A third category, justified wrongs, may prove useful and is necessary to reconciling ordinary usage of the notion of justification with its legal usage. This third category provides a means for classifying and understanding such defenses as duress and reasonable mistake within the context of the psychology of control and responsibility. It provides a means of distinguishing between behaviors that are justified from the perspective of society and those that are justified from the perspective of the actor. Further, the notion of justified wrong is morally as well as cognitively reasonable in that the act of one under duress or facing a necessity reflects a morally acceptable preference of self or some third party over others. 98 footnotes.