The signposts can describe the process of creating the justification (steadfast stories) or tearing down the justifications (change stories). One, however, is not the simple reversal of the other.
When building up justifications, each level is built on and incorporates the previous level. It is not a layering effect so much as adding dimensions and new frames of reference and effort. Sort of like cooking. You may start off with the dry ingredients, but when you add the wet ingredients it not only combines with the dry ingredients but also alters both ingredients in the mixing. Baking adds temperature to the mix and alters the state of the combination as well. Combining the baked goods with other foodstuffs continues to transform each of the previous stages to create a new foodstuff.
At this point it is difficult to examine the product created and know which part is responsible for any particular aspect, though some are more apparent than others.
When tearing down justifications, you cannot reverse the process, e.g. you cannot "unbake the cake", so to speak. Tearing down justifications explores the existence of a previously taken step. In other words, the Influence Character works to reveal to the main character (intentionally or not) that the MC had engaged in a particular process or state at some previous time in an effort to address the MC's personal issue. Once the relevance of this stage has been explored and/or exhausted, the MC is thrust into exploring the next level of its long held justification for approaching its personal issues as it has in its past, and so on until the source of the inequity is revealed and the original approach to the inequity (the path created by following the MC problem element) is abandoned for the path promised by the MC solution element.
The difference between building up justifications and tearing them down is the difference between an egg and a chicken.