Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for کُورسویِ خِرَ‌د

Channel

کُورسویِ خِرَ‌د

@KorsooyeKherad

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

315subscribers

+2 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-1003014970980
TypeChannel
Username@KorsooyeKherad
CreatedBetween 1 August 2025 and 31 October 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded8 August 2026
Last confirmed live16 August 2026
Measurements held3
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 16 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/KorsooyeKherad

Growth

3133153147 August 2026 — 313 subscribers8 August 2026 — 313 subscribers16 August 2026 — 315 subscribers7 August 202616 August 2026
3 measurements spanning 8 days, net +2. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 313–315 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
16 Aug 2026, 03:23315+2
8 Aug 2026, 07:35313no change
7 Aug 2026, 17:30313first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 8 January 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
45.8%
avg views ÷ 315 subscribers
Avg views / post
144
3 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.85%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
3
of 20 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 3 August 2026
Posts held20 (8 January 20263 August 2026)
Views total433
Reactions total8
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken8 Aug 2026, 07:35 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

What this channel posts

Video runtime
10m 19s
Average length
5m 10s

Measured directly from 2 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no mark.

Reaction mix

61 reactions across 17 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 36.1% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
2236.1%
🔥1829.5%
👍1524.6%
🤔34.92%
😁11.64%
😱11.64%
🙏11.64%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 19 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 61reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 8 January 2026 to 3 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
1
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 20 we hold a reading for · 5%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @KorsooyeKherad. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.

Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.

This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.

Counted over the 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 8 January 2026 to 3 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.

Recent posts

3 Aug 2026, 13:39 UTC93 views3 reactionsread 8 August 2026

🔵 آزادی «ابراز عقیده» از منظر جان استیوارت میل 🔸مسئلۀ اصلیِ میل در« رساله در بارهٔ آزادی» تعیینِ حدودِ آزادی فرد در قبالِ قدرتِ سخت( قانون) و نرمِ ( عرف) جامعه است. بنابر برخی تلقّی‌ها ( یا سوء فهم‌ها) از دموکراسی، دموکراسی به معنای « تحمیل ارادۀ اکثریت بر اقلیّت» است. در مقابل، دغدغۀ اصلیِ میل در «رساله» « نفیِ استبدادِ اکثریّت بر اقلیّت» است؛ چه در ساحت ابراز عقیده و چه در ساحت عمل بر طبق عقیده. در فصل نخست وی

🔥3

Signed Reza Naghavi

31 Jul 2026, 08:16 UTC172 views5 reactionsread 8 August 2026

🟤اندر حواشیِ « شیّادی» و « خیّاطی»! 🔹اخیراً ایرادِ اتّهام « شیّادی» به دکتر شریعتی، توسط دکتر غنی‌نژاد، -شاید بیش از حدّ لازم- مورد جدال واقع شده است. لبّ سخن مدافعان شریعتی این است که « خلق شخصیّت» در ساحت فلسفه و نظرورزی امری متداول است و غنی‌نژاد با اتّهام «شیّادی» نشان داده که یا مغرض است؛ یا جاهل. خصوصاً که خود شریعتی در « گفت‌گوهای تنهایی» پرده از شخصیت « پروفسور شاندل» برداشته است. 🔹در مقابل مدافعان غنی‌نژاد

👍4😁1

Signed Reza Naghavi

29 Jul 2026, 08:37 UTC168 views0 reactionsread 8 August 2026

🔵 مسئله «دیگری» در اندیشه لویناس 🔸به شرحی که در نوشتار « اروپامحوری» گذشت، انسانِ مورد تجلیل در اومانیسم نه « انسانِ کلِّی» یا « انسان بما هو انسان»؛ بلکه صرفا « مردِ صاحبِ مالِ مقتدرِ اروپایی» است. این « انسان خاص» خودش را سوژه( فاعلِ شناسا) و دانای مطلق تصوّر می‌کند و بقیه انسانها را به حدّ ابژه‌ای( شئ‌ای) تنزّل می‌دهد که باید او را مانند سایر اشیاء مورد مطالعه قرار داد و از او بهره‌کشی کرد. 🔸این نگاه به سایر ان

Signed Reza Naghavi

8 Jul 2026, 17:08 UTC331 viewsread 8 August 2026

🔵 از اسلامِ لیبرال تا مسلمانِ لیبرال! 🔸اخیراً دکتر عبدالکریم سروش، در جلسه 44 از درسگفتار « قرائت قلبی از قرآن» گفتند: « ما اسلامِ لیبرال نداریم؛ اسلامِ لیبرال معنا ندارد». آقای رضا زمان در متنی کوتاه به نقد اظهاراتِ سروش پرداخته و می‌گوید این سخن به معنای عدولِ سروش از قلبِ پروژۀ روشنفکری دینی، یعنی سازگار کردنِ اسلام با مبانی لیبرالیسم یا همان « قرائت لیبرال از اسلام» است. از نظر ایشان آثار مهمّ سروش مثل قبض و ب

Signed Reza Naghavi

6 Jul 2026, 03:01 UTC257 views5 reactionsread 8 August 2026

👆👆👆 🔸به تعبیر دیگر، بنابر معانیِ سه‌گانۀ ضرروت، دعویِ علیّت میان مقدّمات و نتیجه، ناشی از خلط میان «ضرروت منطقی به معنای مضیّق»، و «ضرورتِ متافیزیکی» است. همچنانکه هیوم، ویتگنشتاین، اصحاب حلقۀ وین و...گفتند؛ قواعدِ منطقِ صوری بالمآل بیانگر حقایق تحلیلی( توتولوژیک) هستند. در منطق جدید نیز توضیح می‌دهند که قواعدِ استنتاج مبتنی بر جدول صدق و جدول صدق مبتنی بر «معنایِ» ثوابتِ منطقی است و بدین معنا قواعد استنتاج تحلیلاً

👍3🔥2

Signed Reza Naghavi

6 Jul 2026, 03:01 UTC223 views2 reactionsread 8 August 2026

🟡 خلطِ میانِ انواعِ «ضرورت» در فلسفۀ معاصرِ غربی و اسلامی 🔸در فلسفۀ منطق و الهیاتِ فلسفیِ معاصر، میانِ سه معنایِ از «ضرورت» تفکیک می‌شود. عدمِ عنایت به این تفکیک موجبِ مغالطاتِ فلسفی و الهیاتی شده و می‌شود. این سه معنا عبارتند از: (1)-ضرورتِ منطقی به معنایِ مضیّق این قسم ضرورت، وصف قضایایی است که به معنایِ کانتی « تحلیلی» نامیده می‌شوند و انکارِ آنها مستلزمِ تناقضِ منطقی است. مانند « هر مثلّثی سه ضلع دارد». (2)

🔥2

Signed Reza Naghavi

26 Jun 2026, 07:01 UTC256 views4 reactionsread 8 August 2026

🟤 معرّفیِ مقاله 🔸در «این مقاله» نویسنده با انتقاد از پاسخ دیویس به « مسئلۀ شرّ»، صورتبندی جدیدی از « برهان اختفاء الهی» را تقویت می‌کند. بنابر پاسخ دیویس، در بحث از مسئلۀ شرّ، خداباوران و خداناباوران، هر دو مرتکب « اشتباه مقوله‌ای» (category mistake) شده‌اند. این اشتباه همان « شخصی‌انگاری» و « انسانوارانگاری» خداوند است که منجر می‌شود آنها خداوند را « کنشگر اخلاقی» و در معرض «ارزشداوریِ اخلاقی» تلقّی کنند. این درحا

🔥3👍1

Signed Reza Naghavi

26 Jun 2026, 07:01 UTC250 views2 reactionsread 8 August 2026
File

Representing God as a moral agent: cognitive roots of the problem of evil and a challenge to classical theists Stanisław Ruczaj @KorsooyeKherad

🔥2

Signed Reza Naghavi

15 Jun 2026, 05:35 UTC304 views3 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @DidgahenochannelFile

صدای عقل، ندای معنا بزرگداشت استاد مصطفی ملکیان با حضور: #عبدالکریم_سروش #سعید_حجاریان #مصطفی_تاجزاده #مریم_نصراصفهانی #حسین_کمالی #ابراهیم_سلطانی #حسین_کاجی #سروش_دباغ #جواد_حیدری #یاسر_میردامادی و #مصطفی_ملکیان June 13 2026 شنبه ۱۴۰۵/۰۳/۲۳ #حلقه_دیدگاه_نو @didgahenochannel

3

Signed Reza Naghavi

13 Jun 2026, 16:01 UTC359 views5 reactionsread 8 August 2026

🟤 اندر رذائلِ لمپنیسمِ روشنفکرمآبانه! 🔸اخیراً با کانالِ علامه‌ی خودخوانده، جامعِ معقول و منقول [ و حبّه‌ی انگول] آقای افشین احمدپور آشنا شدم و از ادبیاتِ به‌شدّت سخیف و چاله‌میدانی آن حقیقتاً مبهوت ماندم. گویی جنابشان بنا به علاّمگی دستی هم در روانشناسیِ عوام دارند و تشخیص فرموده‌اند که برای عوام‌الناس غذای فکری هم مانند غذای جسمی است. همچنانکه غذای جسمی هرچقدر تندتر، شورتر، چرب‌تر باشد، لذیذ‌تر است، غذایِ فکری هم ه

👍5

Signed Reza Naghavi

10 Jun 2026, 10:06 UTC337 views3 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Video

بخشی از سخنرانیِ قدیمی دکتر سروش به زبان انگلیسی، در باب تفاوت اسلام و مسیحیت در نسبت با امر قدسی و امر عرفی(سکولار) دکتر جواد طباطبایی در مواضع متعددی، از جمله در « جدال قدیم و جدید» و «دیباچه ای بر نظریه انحطاط ایران»،ص ۳۱۹-۳۲۴، گفته اند: روشنفکران دینی نمی فهمند که، به خلاف مسیحیتِ نخستین که دینِ «تجسّد» و «قدسانیّت» است و نمی تواند «دنیا» را در استقلال آن و در تعادلی با آخرت مورد توجه قرار دهد، اسلام دیانت «دن

🔥2🤔1

Signed Reza Naghavi

7 Jun 2026, 11:18 UTC375 views2 reactionsread 8 August 2026
File

Islamic Philosophy of Religion Essays from Analytic Perspectives Edited by Mohammad Saleh Zarepour

2

Signed Reza Naghavi

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @KorsooyeKherad. 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

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

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.

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 16 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“کُورسویِ خِرَ‌د” (@KorsooyeKherad), 315 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/KorsooyeKherad.

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.