Argumentation as Scholarly Inquiry: An Emerging Paradigm in Academic Writing

Abstract

This article reconceptualizes academic writing as an epistemic practice of scholarly inquiry, in which argumentation functions not merely as persuasion but as a reflexive mechanism for knowledge construction. It examines the integration of three emerging paradigms: problematization, Rogerian argument and Argumentation-Based Inquiry (ABI) within the broader framework of scholarly argumentation. Drawing on qualitative conceptual synthesis of interdisciplinary literature, the study analyses how these paradigms collectively enhance analytical rigor, foster dialogic engagement and expand the epistemic scope of knowledge production. The synthesis integrates insights from rhetoric and composition studies, educational theory and Himalayan socio-ecological research to demonstrate how argumentation operates within situated and context-dependent knowledge systems.Findings indicate that this integrated approach destabilizes universalizing epistemic models by embracing multiple ontological and epistemological standpoints, thereby promoting pluralistic modes of reasoning. The study further argues that embedding problematization, Rogerian argument and ABI     in academic pedagogy and research practice can strengthen critical thinking, ethical reflexivity and  collaborative knowledge construction. Overall, this paper positions argumentation as a dynamic epistemic and methodological framework that advances more inclusive, reflexive and context-sensitive scholarly knowledge production in higher education.