Every decision involves a series of implicit arguments, each committed to a conclusion that is taken to follow from the relevant premises. Identities of the relevant premises may depend on countless prior decisions, where the underlying arguments are long forgotten and the conclusions internalised as patterns of behaviour, perception and ideation. The capacity to prove or disprove the formative arguments is essential to making logically consistent decisions and to maintain the integrity of Self-ideation. If an argument is proven, it is logically necessary to accept the conclusion as a premise in subsequent arguments; if an argument is not proven, there are insufficient reasons to accept the conclusion. An argument is proven only if the negation/denial of the conclusion implies contradiction, irrespective of whether the proof makes this property explicit. In this article I break down how consistent decision-making works.