أثمّة من يباحثني في المنطق الأرسطيّ من نقّاده وفق المنطق الرّمزيّ؟ إن كان فليأتِ لمجموعتي: https://t.me/chatmtalh

Channel
emberthought
@EmberThought
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
2subscribers
-1,282 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1001920497293 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @EmberThought |
| Created | Between 1 April 2023 and 31 October 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 28 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 10 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 3 times, most recently 28 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/EmberThought |
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 31 Aug 2026, 22:38 | 2 | -1,327 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 01:08 | 1,329 | +19 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 20:22 | 1,310 | -5 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 06:14 | 1,315 | +3 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 18:26 | 1,312 | +4 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 21:42 | 1,308 | +20 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 10:38 | 1,288 | +5 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 19:58 | 1,283 | -2 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 04:53 | 1,285 | +1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 07:32 | 1,284 | first reading |
Engagement
19 posts held, back to 18 July 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 19 posts for this entry, the most recent from 7 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Recent posts
لو احتج مسفسط علي بأني لا أقبل اليقين العادي بماذا أجيب؟ يعني كاليقين بالتواتر أو غيره ويسند ظهره على مايستحيل عادة كالتواطئ — عدم قبول الشّيء إنّما يتعلّق بموضوعه، فالموضوعات لما اختلفت بالشّرف والأهميّة من جملة موضوعات الغايات الّتي نسعى إليها وجدنا أنفسنا نتسمّح فيها فنقبل في هذا الظّنّ ولا نقبل في هذا الظّنّ، ونظرًا لكون يقيننا قليلًا لا لإشكال بِلَوحٍ الواقع إلّا عسرة اكتسابنا بزحام المشاغل وتكاسل الأنفس ومشقّ…
"هناك أبواب لو شئنا لشرحناها، ولأسهبنا في شرحها ولكنّنا أغفلنا بعضها ليبقى للعالم ميزةً بعدي".
شرف علم البلاغة على سائر العلوم العربيّة.
File, posted without a caption
تخيل معي فجأةً وبغتةً باشرتَ رجلًا تقول له: "والله العظيم وأقسم بالله وبربّ العزّة اسمي مؤيّد"، أفتراه يعجب منك منكرًا لِمَ كلّ هذا الجهد في الإثبات؟ فهكذا الأمر في ابتدائك الكلام في كلّ عبارةٍ: "لقد". ما أنقمه على أغلب الكتابة المعاصرة استعمالهم التّوكيد في أقلّ واردة! فتراهم يقولون في كلّ ابتداء مقال وكلام: لقد لقد لقد. و(لقد) كلمةٌ مركّبةٌ من كلمتين: (لـ)، و(قد)، وهما حرفان يفيدان التّوكيد، الأوّل لام التّوكي…
هذا أكثر ما فَجَأني والله في قراءته.
إبطال دعوى الإجماع على حرمة المعازف.
في إطلاقات (الأصل)، حسين محسن العاملي.
حديث سموّ سيّدي الأمير محمّد بن سلمان عن الرّوابط العميقة بين السّعوديّة والعراق.
هذا، ويمتنع في حدّ ذاته أن يكون رسمٌ بلا حدّ البتّة؛ إذ الرّسم معلول لما بالذّات، وما بالعرض لا يكون لشيءٍ دون ما بالذّات، فكيف وقد خصصناه بخواصّه الّتي بالذّات تستسلزم فصلًا ما لأجله كان الاختصاص العرضيّ؟ فالقول بالرّسم دون حدّه تناقضٌ لازم، وإن أنكر الرّسم، فإنّه واقعٌ فيه لا محالة.
المشكلة أنّه منع الرّسم للجزئيّ، ثمّ هو يجيز تحديده بالإشارة الّتي هي قسمٌ من أقسام الرّسم، المجيءُ بالعوارض، وهي الجزئيّات الممثّلة لما يكون بالعرض.
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @EmberThought. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
- Dead references
- 1
- handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
- Evidenced gone
- 1
- we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
- Never seen alive
- 0
- vacant every time we have ever looked
@EmberThought named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Evidenced gone
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026 · confirmed gone 6 September 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 31 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“emberthought” (@EmberThought), 2 subscribers as measured 31 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/EmberThought.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.