Security studies have largely treated the security issue as a given phenomenon and have primarily focused on explaining its causes, consequences, and policy responses. Consequently, the theoretical process through which a social condition becomes a security issue—and the role of paradigmatic assumptions in that process—has received limited attention in the philosophy of social science. This study aims to reconstruct the logic of theoretical problem inference, with an emphasis on the security issue, and to develop a conceptual model explaining this process. The research is theoretical in nature, adopts a qualitative approach, and employs comparative qualitative content analysis. Drawing on foundational texts in the philosophy of social science and key works in security studies, the study reanalyzes ontological, epistemological, and methodological assumptions across major social science paradigms using abductive reasoning. The findings indicate that a security issue is not an inherent property of social phenomena but is constituted through the philosophical assumptions of each paradigm regarding social reality, the possibility of knowledge, and the logic of inquiry. Accordingly, the proposed conceptual model reconstructs theoretical problem inference through three interconnected dimensions—diagnosis, explanation, and intervention—which emerge as logical consequences of the coherence among ontological, epistemological, and methodological foundations rather than as independent analytical or policy stages. The study's main theoretical contribution lies not in redefining security itself but in reconstructing the paradigmatic logic of security issue formation, shifting the analytical focus from responses to security issues toward the conditions that make them theoretically conceivable. The proposed model also provides a conceptual framework applicable to the analysis of other social issues beyond security.