Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for آموزش تفکر نقادانه

Channel

آموزش تفکر نقادانه

@wikifallacy

On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

6,592subscribers

+407 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001250885233
TypeChannel
Username@wikifallacy
CreatedBetween 1 March 2018 and 31 August 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live10 November 2026
Measurements held25
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 10 November 2026
On Telegramt.me/wikifallacy

Topic

Education — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 98% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.

Growth

6,1856,5926,388.56 August 2026 — 6,185 subscribers6 August 2026 — 6,188 subscribers9 August 2026 — 6,196 subscribers12 August 2026 — 6,197 subscribers15 August 2026 — 6,186 subscribers18 August 2026 — 6,199 subscribers21 August 2026 — 6,205 subscribers24 August 2026 — 6,219 subscribers27 August 2026 — 6,265 subscribers30 August 2026 — 6,281 subscribers2 September 2026 — 6,307 subscribers6 September 2026 — 6,332 subscribers11 September 2026 — 6,337 subscribers15 September 2026 — 6,341 subscribers29 September 2026 — 6,415 subscribers6 October 2026 — 6,457 subscribers13 October 2026 — 6,510 subscribers16 October 2026 — 6,534 subscribers19 October 2026 — 6,546 subscribers22 October 2026 — 6,562 subscribers25 October 2026 — 6,564 subscribers28 October 2026 — 6,574 subscribers31 October 2026 — 6,581 subscribers6 November 2026 — 6,583 subscribers10 November 2026 — 6,592 subscribers6 August 202610 November 2026
25 measurements spanning 96 days, net +407. 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 6,124–6,653 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 25
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
10 Nov 2026, 16:356,592+9
6 Nov 2026, 19:506,583+2
31 Oct 2026, 21:276,581+7
28 Oct 2026, 23:066,574+10
25 Oct 2026, 14:186,564+2
22 Oct 2026, 21:396,562+16
19 Oct 2026, 09:366,546+12
16 Oct 2026, 12:016,534+24
13 Oct 2026, 02:576,510+53
6 Oct 2026, 09:156,457+42
29 Sept 2026, 07:406,415+74
15 Sept 2026, 18:026,341+4
11 Sept 2026, 17:406,337+5
6 Sept 2026, 20:586,332+25
2 Sept 2026, 07:256,307+26
30 Aug 2026, 11:556,281+16
27 Aug 2026, 14:346,265+46
24 Aug 2026, 17:126,219+14
21 Aug 2026, 12:136,205+6
18 Aug 2026, 08:116,199first reading

Engagement

43 posts held, back to 4 June 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 17 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
39.6%
avg views ÷ 6,592 subscribers
Avg views / post
2,610
8 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.03%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
8
of 43 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 8 November 2026
Posts held43 (4 June 2026 – 8 November 2026)
Views total20,900
Reactions total216
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken9 Nov 2026, 09:32 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.

Reaction mix

1,450 reactions across 42 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 52.6% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
❤76252.6%
👍41828.8%
👏1037.10%
🙏986.76%
👌644.41%
👎50.345%

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 43 of the 43 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 1,500 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 43 most recent posts we hold, published 4 June 2026 to 8 November 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.

Recent posts

Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 8 of 8 posts held from the last 30 days (100.0%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).

8 Nov 2026, 03:48 UTC≈3,400 views24 reactionsread 9 November 2026
File

🎙️ پادکست گوش دادن نقادانه یکی از همراهان باذوق کانال «آموزش تفکر نقادانه» با استفاده از هوش مصنوعی Notebook زحمت کشیدند پادکست کتاب «گوش دادن نقادانه» را تهیه کرده‌اند. از ابتکار ارزشمند ایشان صمیمانه سپاسگزارم. 🌱 آموزش تفکر نقادانه https://t.me/wikifallacy

❤13👏6🙏3👍2

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

1 Nov 2026, 20:47 UTC≈1,750 views41 reactionsread 9 November 2026

شباهت نقد اندیشه و عمل جراحی نقد اندیشه مانند عمل جراحی‌ست؛ هدف نقد برداشتن خطا و اصلاح اندیشه‌ی معیوب است، نه آسیب‌زدن به صاحب اندیشه. جراح ماهر میان بیمار و بیماری فرق می‌گذارد؛ متفکر نقاد نیز میان انسان و خطای فکری او تمایز قائل می‌شود. @wikifallacy

👏21❤13👍4🙏3

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

31 Oct 2026, 19:54 UTC≈1,710 views22 reactionsread 9 November 2026

خلاصه‌ی کتاب گوش دادن نقادانه 📙 Critical Listening تلخیص: محمدرضا سلیمی کتاب گوش دادن نقادانه به بررسی اهمیت گوش دادن موثر و نقش آن در برقراری ارتباطات انسانی می‌پردازد. نویسندگان توضیح می‌دهند که شنیدن با گوش دادن تفاوت دارد؛ شنیدن صرفاً دریافت صدا از طریق حس شنوایی‌ست، اما گوش دادن فرایندی آگاهانه و ذهنی‌ست که به تمرکز، درک، تفسیر و توجه نیاز دارد. در واقع، گوش دادن نقادانه به افراد کمک می‌کند تا علاوه بر دریافت…

❤15🙏4👏2👍1

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

31 Oct 2026, 19:52 UTC≈1,350 views12 reactionsread 9 November 2026
File

📙 گوش دادن نقادانه 📙 Critical Listening کتاب گوش دادن نقادانه به زبان اصلی‌ست. در این کتاب کم‌حجم، نویسندگان تفاوت بین شنیدن و گوش دادن را شرح می‌دهند. سپس، فرایند گوش دادن موثر را توضیح می‌دهند. همچنین، به موانع گوش دادن نقادانه اشاره می‌کنند. درنهایت، نویسندگان تاکید می‌کنند گوش دادن نقادانه نقش مهمی در زندگی شخصی، شغلی، اجتماعی و تحصیلی افراد دارد و به ویژه در مذاکره، مشاوره، مدیریت و حل اختلافات ضروری‌ست. آموز…

❤11🙏1

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

28 Oct 2026, 17:22 UTC≈1,930 views60 reactionsread 9 November 2026
File

🎙️ چگونه نقادانه بیندیشیم؟ یکی از همراهان عزیز کانال آموزش تفکر نقادانه، جناب آقای حمیدرضا آریایی، لطف کردند سخنرانی روز سه‌شنبه ۵ آبان را ضبط کردند. از ایشان بابت این لطف و همراهی صمیمانه سپاسگزارم. 🌱 فایل ضبط‌شده را تقدیم می‌کنم به شما دوستان عزیز؛ امیدوارم برایتان مفید باشد. 🙏 مدت سخنرانی: ۹۵ دقیقه سخنران: محمدرضا سلیمی آموزش تفکر نقادانه https://t.me/wikifallacy

❤46🙏13👍1

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

23 Oct 2026, 10:59 UTC≈2,770 views20 reactionsread 9 November 2026
Photo

سخنرانی در گوگل‌میت موضوع: چگونه نقادانه بیندیشیم؟ How to Think Critically? سخنران: محمدرضا سلیمی 🗓 زمان: سه‌شنبه ۵ آبان ۱۴۰۵ 🕘 ساعت: ۹ شب به وقت تهران این سخنرانی شامل سه بخش کلی‌ست. بخش اول: ابتدا به دو سوال اساسی زیر پاسخ می‌دهیم. ۱. چرا لازم است نقادانه بیندیشیم؟ ۲. تفکر نقادانه یعنی چه؟ بخش دوم: به موضوع سخنرانی می‌پردازیم‌ که در قالب یک سؤال مطرح شده است. سوال «چگونه نقادانه بیندیشیم؟» مبهم است. درواق…

❤16👍2🙏2

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

17 Oct 2026, 18:28 UTC≈5,940 views24 reactionsread 9 November 2026

📙 خلاصه‌ی کتاب منطقی بودن: راهنمایی برای خوب اندیشیدن 📙 Being Logical: A Guide for Good Thinking 🖌 نویسنده: دی. کیو. مک‌اینرنی 📝 تلخیص: محمدرضا سلیمی کتاب منطقی بودن: راهنمایی برای خوب اندیشیدن با هدف اصلی آموزش هنرِ درست اندیشیدن و تبدیل اصول منطق به مهارتی عملی در زندگی روزمره نوشته شده است. نویسنده قصد دارد به خواننده کمک کند تا از دانستن قواعد منطق فراتر برود و بتواند در عمل شفاف‌تر، دقیق‌تر، منسجم‌تر و مؤثرت…

❤16👍5🙏3

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

17 Oct 2026, 18:02 UTC≈2,050 views13 reactionsread 9 November 2026
File

📙 منطقی بودن: راهنمایی برای خوب اندیشیدن 📙 Being Logical: A Guide for Good Thinking 🖌 نویسنده: دی. کیو. مک‌اینِرنی این کتاب به زبان‌ اصلی‌ست و شامل پنج بخش است. بخش اول: آماده‌سازی ذهن برای منطق بخش دوم: اصول و قواعد اساسی منطق بخش سوم: استدلال؛ زبان منطق بخش چهام: خاستگاه‌های تفکر غیرمنطقی بخش پنجم: صورت‌های اصلی تفکر غیرمنطقی (الگوها و مغالطه‌های تفکر غیرمنطقی) در این کتاب نویسنده به پنج سوال کلی و کلیدی د…

❤8👍4🙏1

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

2 Oct 2026, 11:06 UTC≈3,030 views16 reactionsread 9 November 2026
Poll

❓️سؤال: مغالطه‌ی برون‌سپاری از کدام خطای شناختی نشئت می‌گیرد؟

  1. ۱. خطای شناختی اقتدار31%
  2. ۲. خطای شناختی اقدام18%
  3. ۳. خطای شناختی اعتماد‌به‌نفس کاذب21%
  4. ۴. خطای شناختی انتخاب30%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

❤16

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

2 Oct 2026, 10:26 UTC≈3,040 views31 reactionsread 9 November 2026

مغالطه‌ی برون‌سپاری: چرا نباید مسئولیت اندیشیدن را به دیگران واگذار کنیم؟ The Fallacy of Outsourcing 📝 محمدرضا سلیمی مغالطه‌ی برون‌سپاری زمانی اتفاق می‌افتد که فرد به‌جای اینکه خودش درباره‌ی یک موضوع یا یک مسئله بیندیشد، قضاوت کند و تصمیم بگیرد؛ مسئولیت تفکر، قضاوت و تصمیم‌گیری را به شخص، گروه یا مرجعی دیگر واگذار کند و نتیجه را بدون بررسی کافی بپذیرد. ساختار منطقی مغالطه‌ی برون‌سپاری: «من نمی‌دانم. او می‌داند. …

❤10👏10👌7👍4

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

25 Sept 2026, 07:52 UTC≈3,500 views51 reactionsread 9 November 2026

سوگیری زیبایی‌شناختی: وقتی زیبایی قضاوت اخلاقی ما را شکل می‌دهد. The Aesthetic Bias 📝 محمدرضا سلیمی «اگر سوسکی را بکشید، ممکن است شما قهرمان‌ به نظر برسید؛ اما اگر پروانه‌ای را بکشید، شما شاید شیطان‌ تلقی شوید.» در این استدلال نوعی خطای شناختی نهفته است که به آن «سوگیری زیبایی‌شناختی» می‌گویند. سوگیری زیبایی‌شناختی زمانی اتفاق می‌افتد که زیبایی بر قضاوت ما تأثیر می‌گذارد. سوگیری زیبایی‌شناختی یعنی تمایل ذهن به ار…

👍30❤16🙏4👎1

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

21 Sept 2026, 20:25 UTC≈6,810 views31 reactionsread 9 November 2026
File

نقد یعنی چه؟ چگونه بدیهیات (پیش‌فرض‌ها) را نقد کنیم؟ سخنران: شاهین مدرس آموزش تفکر نقادانه @wikifallacy

❤23👍8

Signed Mohammadreza Salimi

Showing the 12 most recent of 43 posts we hold for @wikifallacy. 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.

Posts edited after publishing

@wikifallacy edited 1 post after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.

An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.

First edit seen
8 August 2026
Most recent edit
8 August 2026

Polls

The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.

2 Oct 2026, 11:06 UTCAnonymous Quiz325 voters

❓️سؤال: مغالطه‌ی برون‌سپاری از کدام خطای شناختی نشئت می‌گیرد؟

  1. ۱. خطای شناختی اقتدار31%
  2. ۲. خطای شناختی اقدام18%
  3. ۳. خطای شناختی اعتماد‌به‌نفس کاذب21%
  4. ۴. خطای شناختی انتخاب30%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.

The shares need not add up to 100. Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.

Read from the 43 most recent posts we hold, published 4 June 2026 to 8 November 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.

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

Named by 10 registered channels — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

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.

Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels

The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.

وبسایت فرهنگی صدانت
@Sedanet · 21,511
Telegram ranks this channel #32 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 23 September 2026
ProxyLegram
@ProxyLegram · 24,392
Telegram ranks this channel #34 of 63 here — alongside 62 others — read 15 September 2026
Keep Smiling
@pics_net · 44,084
Telegram ranks this channel #43 of 75 here — alongside 74 others — read 28 August 2026
پادکست رخ
@podcastrokh · 19,219
Telegram ranks this channel #50 of 75 here — alongside 74 others — read 5 October 2026
هزار و یک پادکست
@OneThousandandOnePodcast · 35,690
Telegram ranks this channel #51 of 77 here — alongside 76 others — read 6 September 2026
Sherwin Vakili (شروین وکیلی)
@sherwin_vakili · 22,219
Telegram ranks this channel #60 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 21 September 2026
آکادمی پژوهش دکتر خاوریان
@phdiran · 23,971
Telegram ranks this channel #61 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 17 September 2026
آموزش زبان فرانسه 🇫🇷 زهرا نوری
@TefTeacher · 41,685
Telegram ranks this channel #61 of 80 here — alongside 79 others — read 29 August 2026
خوانش کتاب برای انسان خردمند
@homosapiensfa · 44,393
Telegram ranks this channel #64 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 28 August 2026
روانشناسی آرامش ذهن
@Arameshzehn44 · 49,379
Telegram ranks this channel #66 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 26 August 2026
دیالکتیک علمی
@ScientificDialectics · 23,637
Telegram ranks this channel #76 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 16 September 2026
| پادکست فارسی انسانک |
@ensanak · 31,418
Telegram ranks this channel #76 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 6 September 2026
🕊 فرازتد⚡️(روشنگری)
@FarazTed · 21,173
Telegram ranks this channel #84 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 26 September 2026
مدیران ایران | آموزش مدیریت کسب وکار |modiriran 🕊
@modiriran · 34,253
Telegram ranks this channel #84 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 2 September 2026
دانش، آگاهی
@daneshagahi · 28,685
Telegram ranks this channel #85 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 10 September 2026

This channel appears in 15 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.

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 10 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“آموزش تفکر نقادانه” (@wikifallacy), 6,592 subscribers as measured 10 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/wikifallacy.

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.