Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for Insolarance Cult

Channel

Insolarance Cult

@insolarance

On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

11,501subscribers

+281 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001338963723
TypeChannel
Username@insolarance
Created2 April 2019 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live5 November 2026
Measurements held49
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 5 November 2026
On Telegramt.me/insolarance

Topic

Other / unclassifiable — 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 11 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 57% 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

11,21811,50811,3636 August 2026 — 11,220 subscribers6 August 2026 — 11,220 subscribers7 August 2026 — 11,218 subscribers8 August 2026 — 11,223 subscribers10 August 2026 — 11,226 subscribers11 August 2026 — 11,229 subscribers13 August 2026 — 11,230 subscribers15 August 2026 — 11,238 subscribers16 August 2026 — 11,244 subscribers19 August 2026 — 11,253 subscribers19 August 2026 — 11,256 subscribers20 August 2026 — 11,262 subscribers24 August 2026 — 11,260 subscribers26 August 2026 — 11,264 subscribers27 August 2026 — 11,276 subscribers28 August 2026 — 11,282 subscribers29 August 2026 — 11,285 subscribers30 August 2026 — 11,287 subscribers31 August 2026 — 11,291 subscribers1 September 2026 — 11,298 subscribers2 September 2026 — 11,302 subscribers3 September 2026 — 11,305 subscribers5 September 2026 — 11,308 subscribers9 September 2026 — 11,311 subscribers11 September 2026 — 11,316 subscribers13 September 2026 — 11,320 subscribers17 September 2026 — 11,322 subscribers19 September 2026 — 11,333 subscribers26 September 2026 — 11,394 subscribers4 October 2026 — 11,429 subscribers9 October 2026 — 11,451 subscribers13 October 2026 — 11,470 subscribers14 October 2026 — 11,477 subscribers15 October 2026 — 11,471 subscribers16 October 2026 — 11,474 subscribers17 October 2026 — 11,478 subscribers19 October 2026 — 11,487 subscribers20 October 2026 — 11,486 subscribers22 October 2026 — 11,493 subscribers23 October 2026 — 11,501 subscribers24 October 2026 — 11,506 subscribers25 October 2026 — 11,504 subscribers28 October 2026 — 11,505 subscribers29 October 2026 — 11,508 subscribers30 October 2026 — 11,502 subscribers1 November 2026 — 11,496 subscribers2 November 2026 — 11,494 subscribers4 November 2026 — 11,495 subscribers5 November 2026 — 11,501 subscribers11,5016 August 20265 November 2026
49 measurements spanning 92 days, net +281. 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 11,175–11,552 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 49
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
5 Nov 2026, 18:1711,501+6
4 Nov 2026, 16:3911,495+1
2 Nov 2026, 14:1611,494-2
1 Nov 2026, 16:0011,496-6
30 Oct 2026, 14:3611,502-6
29 Oct 2026, 13:5711,508+3
28 Oct 2026, 14:1711,505+1
25 Oct 2026, 09:3011,504-2
24 Oct 2026, 06:5011,506+5
23 Oct 2026, 03:4711,501+8
22 Oct 2026, 03:3411,493+7
20 Oct 2026, 22:5911,486-1
19 Oct 2026, 23:1011,487+9
17 Oct 2026, 22:0011,478+4
16 Oct 2026, 19:0711,474+3
15 Oct 2026, 21:1011,471-6
14 Oct 2026, 20:3111,477+7
13 Oct 2026, 10:4711,470+19
9 Oct 2026, 05:5811,451+22
4 Oct 2026, 16:1911,429first reading

Engagement

54 posts held, back to 21 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 47 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
36.1%
avg views ÷ 11,501 subscribers
Avg views / post
4,150
14 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.37%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
14
of 54 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 4 November 2026
Posts held54 (21 July 2026 – 4 November 2026)
Views total58,150
Reactions total798
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken5 Nov 2026, 07:32 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

3,025 reactions across 52 posts, in 16 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 35.8% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
❤1,08235.8%
🔥49516.4%
❤‍🔥39913.2%
⚡2889.52%
custom 52492058941215344231364.50%
👍1334.40%
🌚1153.80%
custom 52470500352873094881143.77%
custom 5247076664084543509913.01%
🤔652.15%
custom 5949786897722117003341.12%
😢220.727%
custom 5361999028168959515150.496%
custom 5224311404680482463140.463%
custom 5361796971432520216110.364%
💋110.364%

Custom emoji. 7 of the rows above are Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The counts beside them are Telegram’s.

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 54 of the 54 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 3,099 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 54 most recent posts we hold, published 21 July 2026 to 4 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.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
4
across the posts below
Posts paid on
4
of 54 we hold a reading for · 7%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @insolarance. 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 54 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 21 July 2026 to 4 November 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

Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 1 of 14 posts held from the last 30 days (7.14%) 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).

4 Nov 2026, 09:44 UTC≈1,200 views36 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

Первые подходы к теме Другого можно найти у Фихте (проблематика Я и не-Я), Гегеля (другое сознание в «Феноменологии духа» плюс само деление на «в-себе» «для-себя» и «для-другого»), Кьеркегора (анонимный другой, например, публика) и ряда других. А с начала ХХ века именно понятие «Другой» войдет в широкий обиход, но останется очень разнообразным в своих трактовках. У Гуссерля это возможность отличия других сознаний от …

❤18❤‍🔥9🔥4👍3💋2

31 Oct 2026, 18:10 UTC≈2,030 views38 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

Восприятие — это лишь великая иллюзия? От первого лица мир кажется детализированным и непрерывным, однако исследования показывают, что наш познавательный контакт с реальностью чрезвычайно ограничен. Поскольку в опыте мы не замечаем большую часть этих ограничений, некоторые философы утверждают, что мы пребываем в глобальной иллюзии. Вместе с Андреем Коченковым мы обсуждаем гипотезу великой иллюзии и вдохновившие её эк…

❤22🔥7🌚3👍2custom 52243114046804824632custom 52470766640845435092

29 Oct 2026, 17:51 UTC≈1,660 views26 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Forwarded from @jesuistropchaud

Тристан Гарсия. Интенсивная жизнь. С эпохального выступления «Метод драматизации», пожалуй, наиболее интенсивного события в западной континентальной философии, прошло более полувека. Великий мыслитель, прочитавший этот доклад, не только сумел заразить целое поколение мыслителей желанием «всё истолковывать в качестве интенсивностей», но и учредил определённый идеал мышления. Мышления, наполненного жизнью и наэлектриз…

❤11🔥7👍6🌚2

29 Oct 2026, 10:03 UTC≈2,320 views55 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

Наиболее популярным аргументом против «китайской комнаты »за всю историю обсуждения сам Серл считал так называемое системное возражение. Основная идея контраргумента состоит в указании на то, что Китайская комната требует от части системы свойств, которые присущи лишь системе целиком. Простейший пример, к которому зачастую прибегают защитники системного возражения, – человеческий мозг. Отдельно взятый нейрон мозга не…

❤30⚡9🌚8🔥6💋1🤔1

27 Oct 2026, 08:27 UTC≈2,260 views63 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

Вероятно, в философии нет такого исследования, которое какая-нибудь школа мысли не считала бы пустой тратой усилий — бисером, растраченным на взаимное перемывание косточек. Голосование за исключение темы из области философии не даст результатов, которым стоит следовать, а диктатура будет еще хуже, поэтому, я считаю, пусть расцветают тысяча цветов. Но просто помните: если вы позволите расцвести тысяче цветов, ожидайте…

❤41🔥11❤‍🔥6custom 52243114046804824633😢2

25 Oct 2026, 18:21 UTC≈4,030 views79 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

Марксистский социализм в своей сердцевине глубоко оптимистичен. Ибо как бы основательна ни была его критика капиталистических и буржуазных институтов, он привержен утверждению, что внутри общества, конституированного этими институтами, накапливаются все человеческие и материальные предпосылки лучшего будущего. Однако если моральное оскудение развитого капитализма таково, каким его считают столь многие марксисты, то о…

🔥50❤‍🔥8⚡7🌚5🤔3custom 52470766640845435093❤2😢1

24 Oct 2026, 11:12 UTC≈3,110 views41 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

Моральный дискурс ложен, а понятия вроде «добра» и «зла» лишь систематически вводят нас в заблуждение? Вместе с Андреем Леманом обсуждаем теорию ошибок в новом выпуске нашего подкаста, который уже доступен на Бусти и Патреоне. Выясняем, в чем мораль страннее магии и почему критика объективности морали не навредила, а помогла моральным реалистам.

❤19🔥11❤‍🔥5🌚3custom 52243114046804824633

20 Oct 2026, 15:40 UTC≈4,470 views82 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

Читатель Делёза — субъект предположительно глупый. Поскольку же никто не любит казаться глупцом, признавая себя за такового a fortiori, и поскольку проницательность самого Делёза поражает, то читателю не остаётся ничего другого, как принять ложное за истинное. Ги Лардро

custom 524707666408454350953🌚11❤7custom 52243114046804824636⚡3👍1🔥1

20 Oct 2026, 15:00 UTC≈3,640 views69 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Forwarded from @pathwaysofaletheia

Между тем Шестов протестует как раз против нейтрального, лишенного конкретности описания «удела человеческого». Для него личная, телесно обусловленная ситуация несводима к частному случаю универсальной человеческой ситуации. Все, чего на самом деле хотел Кьеркегор, это спать с Региной Ольсен и быть счастливым. Если бы он мог с ней спать, то, полагает Шестов, он моментально забыл бы весь свой экзистентриализм и филосо…

custom 524707666408454350933❤15🔥8🤔8❤‍🔥4👍1

20 Oct 2026, 09:09 UTC≈2,960 views52 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Forwarded from @philosophycafemoscow

«Преподавание философии сталкивается с той же чрезвычайной трудностью, с какой столкнулось бы преподавание географии школьнику, который приносит с собой огромное количество ложных и слишком упрощённых образов русел рек и расположения горных цепей» Витгенштейн, Философия, pp. 53–55.

🌚25👍12❤11🔥4

20 Oct 2026, 07:40 UTC≈2,820 views29 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Forwarded from @luckystrikephilosophyPhoto

Мы приглашаем всех искателей сакрального и любителей философии религии на новый курс! Выражая невыразимое: от истоков тезима до "смерти Бога" Записаться можно по анкете, либо написав напрямую в личку: @firefight_er Вся программа курса в карточках! Самое важное: 1. Старт - 4 ноября. 2. Цена: 5000 руб за весь курс (60usd/55eur). 3. 9 онлайн-встреч (лекция с обсуждением). 4. Сложность: легко, популярно и доступно. 5…

🔥13❤8⚡3😢2custom 53617969714325202162👍1

19 Oct 2026, 13:00 UTC≈4,190 views66 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

Зачем Делёз подкрадывался к философам сзади? Александр Сковородко перевёл доклад Ги Лардро, в котором французский философ-ангелист показывает, как Делёз обращался с историей философии. По Лардро, изложение чужих систем порой способно сказать о философии автора намного больше, чем его прямые высказывания.

❤‍🔥35❤14custom 53617969714325202169🤔5🌚3

Showing the 12 most recent of 54 posts we hold for @insolarance. 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

Named by 8 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.

PhilosophyToday
@Philosophytoday · 19,747
Telegram ranks this channel #12 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 30 September 2026
Книжные Подборки
@knizhnye_podborki · 22,645
Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 21 September 2026
4я книга Науки Логики
@starpear1724 · 22,231
Telegram ranks this channel #21 of 69 here — alongside 68 others — read 27 September 2026
Немецкая философия
@deutschephilosophiee · 27,621
Telegram ranks this channel #30 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 10 September 2026
Книжный импорт
@importknig · 35,469
Telegram ranks this channel #49 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 2 September 2026
Клинический психоанализ
@clinicalpsychoanalysis · 36,715
Telegram ranks this channel #80 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 1 September 2026
Горький
@gorky_media · 19,001
Telegram ranks this channel #83 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 5 October 2026
ПостНаука
@postnauka · 22,229
Telegram ranks this channel #93 of 99 here — alongside 98 others — read 23 September 2026

This channel appears in 8 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 5 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Insolarance Cult” (@insolarance), 11,501 subscribers as measured 5 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/insolarance.

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.