Which of the following statements is a correct application of conditional reasoning?

The statement "If it rains, then the ground will be wet" correctly exemplifies conditional reasoning, as it establishes a clear cause-and-effect relationship. It outlines a scenario where rain is the sufficient condition that leads to the ground being wet, indicating that if the condition of rain occurs, the result—or consequence—is that the ground will be wet. This aligns with the fundamental structure of conditional reasoning, where one event (the condition) leads directly to another event (the outcome).

Understanding this also highlights why the other options do not accurately represent a proper application of conditional reasoning. For example, stating that "if the ground is wet, then it must be raining" incorrectly asserts a direct cause, failing to allow for other possible explanations for the wet ground. Similarly, the statement "only if it rains, will the ground be wet" introduces an exclusivity that is not present in the original premise, while "the ground is wet, therefore it must have rained" draws a conclusion without sufficient evidence, thus bypassing the conditional approach that establishes a necessary relationship.