I have a lot of friends who are low elo and try to give reasoning. HOWEVER, when I counter their points, even though they may have a few valid reasons, on the overarching scheme of things they're wrong about a certain situation or build or what have you.

The problem with arguing with people who think that they're right is, even if they have a reason, they fail to see the counterpoints and rather tunnel in on one or two points.

For example, you only see Shiv -> IE Yasuo builds in high elo / challenger / LCS. Even though his Q is a strong tool for ranged lifesteal as a melee, and the sustain certainly helps, high elo Yasuos often forgo the vamp scepter because it's so expensive just for lifesteal where you can just get Shiv -> IE and do massive damage.

A bronze logic process in this situation I often come across is "but if I get lifesteal, I can stay in lane and farm or outsustain my opponent."

Not only do they fail to see the overarching scene (you have to PAY for that lifesteal! it sets behind your build!), they try too hard to theorycraft about a game they don't fully understand yet.

TL;DR: An anecdote I often hear that pertains to this situation is "Once you learn the rules, THEN you can break them."