correlation causation

[seychelles1718]

Can different causal argument answer choices describe the same flaw?
For example,

My dog barks whenever it rains.
Therefore, raining causes my dog to bark.

Causal argument answer choice 1. The argument overlooks the possibility that the dog's bark could cause raining. (reverse)
Causal argument answer choice 2. The argument overlooks the possibility that something else could cause both raining and the bark. (a third factor as the common cause)

Thanks!

[ohthatpatrick]

If your question is, "Could either one of these ideas be a correct answer?", then yes.

And, of course, LSAT would never simultaneously present us with both options and make us choose.

Sometimes reverse causality is off the table because we already know the chronology.
i.e. if we knew that rain happened and THEN the barking occurred, then we can no longer argue reverse causality.

And naturally LSAT wouldn't willfully abuse common sense by selling us on a story like "the barking causes the rain", but I don't think you meant THAT as a serious example, just as a way to exhibit the form.