If sufficient reasons were strictly demonstrations, the PSR would apply only to necessary truths, contradicting Leibniz's explicit extension of PSR to contingent facts and God's free choices.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

God's free choices(a key example Leibniz uses to show PSR applies beyond just necessary truths): According to Leibniz, the decisions God makes that are free (not forced) but still have reasons explaining them, like why God chose to create this particular universe.
Leibniz: Leibniz is a German philosopher and mathematician from the 1600s-1700s who developed calculus (a powerful math tool for measuring change and areas) independently around the same time as Isaac Newton. He's famous for creating much of the notation we still use in mathematics today and for arguing that everything in the universe follows logical principles. His ideas profoundly influenced modern science, mathematics, and philosophy, making him one of history's most important thinkers.
PSR(Leibniz's domain-based characterization of logical principles): Principle of Sufficient Reason; governs the domains of metaphysics, natural theology, and physics
contingent facts(Contrasted with necessary truths that metaphysics seeks to establish)

Based on where you are in your exploration