Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for Ставка Паскаля | Андрей Леман

Channel

Ставка Паскаля | Андрей Леман

@luckystrikephilosophy

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

5,934subscribers

+170 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-1001226395535
TypeChannel
Username@luckystrikephilosophy
Created28 July 2018 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live5 November 2026
Measurements held25
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 5 November 2026
On Telegramt.me/luckystrikephilosophy

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 94% 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

5,7635,9475,8556 August 2026 — 5,764 subscribers6 August 2026 — 5,763 subscribers9 August 2026 — 5,777 subscribers13 August 2026 — 5,790 subscribers16 August 2026 — 5,801 subscribers19 August 2026 — 5,803 subscribers23 August 2026 — 5,812 subscribers26 August 2026 — 5,801 subscribers29 August 2026 — 5,804 subscribers1 September 2026 — 5,839 subscribers4 September 2026 — 5,862 subscribers10 September 2026 — 5,887 subscribers13 September 2026 — 5,893 subscribers17 September 2026 — 5,895 subscribers26 September 2026 — 5,913 subscribers5 October 2026 — 5,918 subscribers14 October 2026 — 5,924 subscribers17 October 2026 — 5,920 subscribers20 October 2026 — 5,921 subscribers23 October 2026 — 5,926 subscribers25 October 2026 — 5,941 subscribers28 October 2026 — 5,932 subscribers31 October 2026 — 5,945 subscribers2 November 2026 — 5,947 subscribers5 November 2026 — 5,934 subscribers5,9346 August 20265 November 2026
25 measurements spanning 91 days, net +170. 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 5,735–5,975 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 25
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
5 Nov 2026, 14:095,934-13
2 Nov 2026, 20:265,947+2
31 Oct 2026, 05:195,945+13
28 Oct 2026, 08:265,932-9
25 Oct 2026, 19:075,941+15
23 Oct 2026, 01:005,926+5
20 Oct 2026, 08:585,921+1
17 Oct 2026, 05:365,920-4
14 Oct 2026, 12:265,924+6
5 Oct 2026, 06:375,918+5
26 Sept 2026, 23:585,913+18
17 Sept 2026, 15:415,895+2
13 Sept 2026, 23:375,893+6
10 Sept 2026, 00:175,887+25
4 Sept 2026, 17:015,862+23
1 Sept 2026, 09:355,839+35
29 Aug 2026, 08:535,804+3
26 Aug 2026, 06:225,801-11
23 Aug 2026, 02:265,812+9
19 Aug 2026, 22:115,803first reading

Engagement

33 posts held, back to 18 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 14 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
30.4%
avg views ÷ 5,934 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,800
6 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.36%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
6
of 33 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 held33 (18 June 2026 – 4 November 2026)
Views total10,816
Reactions total147
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken5 Nov 2026, 01:09 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

1,125 reactions across 33 posts, in 4 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 54.8% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
custom 603960508776710527561754.8%
custom 538200331938642058134130.3%
custom 538211289688704308114212.6%
🗿252.22%

Custom emoji. 3 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 33 of the 33 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 1,125 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 33 most recent posts we hold, published 18 June 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
13
across the posts below
Posts paid on
10
of 33 we hold a reading for · 30%
Most on one post
2
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @luckystrikephilosophy. 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 33 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 18 June 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: 3 of 6 posts held from the last 30 days (50.0%) 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).

4 Nov 2026, 09:02 UTC535 views13 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

Зачем современному человеку философия? Мы обсуждаем, существует ли свобода воли, как обосновать моральные убеждения и что значит жить хорошо. Но зачем человеку вообще задаваться этими вопросами ? Именно этой теме будет посвящена лекция Фёдора Ивановича Гиренка «Зачем человеку философия», которая пройдёт уже 6 ноября в 19:30 в московском лектории «Сарёнок». Фёдор Иванович - доктор философских наук, профессор МГУ, …

🗿8custom 53820033193864205815

2 Nov 2026, 16:04 UTC842 views8 reactionsread 5 November 2026

Анонсы на ноябрь: 🟡3-го числа в 18 мск - разговорный стрим (следующий не скоро). ⏺4-го числа в 19 мск - первая лекция курса «Выражая невыразимое» (можно успеть записаться). 🟡8-го числа в 16 мск - клубная встреча по метаэтическому конструктивизму. ⏺18-го числа вечером проведу очную лекцию по стоицизму Сенеки. 🟡22-го числа в 16 мск - клубная встреча по Томасу Гоббсу.

custom 53820033193864205818

2 Nov 2026, 13:42 UTC822 views9 reactionsread 5 November 2026

Я завершил девятый месяц метафилософского клуба, в рамках которого мы разбирали метаэтический нон-натурализм и плюралистическую деонтологию Д. Росса. Десятый месяц стартует в это воскресенье, как обычно, в 16:00 по мск. Поэтому, если кто-то желает присоединиться - буду вас ждать-с. На ноябрь выпали следующие темы: метаэтический конструктивизм и моральная философия Томаса Гоббса. ⏺ Метаэтический конструктивизм неод…

custom 60396050877671052754custom 53821128968870430813custom 53820033193864205812

2 Nov 2026, 06:46 UTC957 views51 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

The Oxford Handbook of the History of Ethics Roger Crisp Published: 30.10.2015 ⏺Возможно, это лучшее исследование, посвященное истории этики, которое я находил. Многие другие работы по теме либо слишком поверхностны, либо узкоспециализированы. Этот сборник, в свою очередь, охватывает практически все ключевые школы моральной мысли, авторов и теории, имеющие значение для истории западной этики. ⏺Хотя текст не предна…

custom 603960508776710527541custom 53820033193864205819🗿1

26 Oct 2026, 10:30 UTC≈1,720 views26 reactionsread 5 November 2026

🐕 Я вернулся с отпусков и развлечений, поэтому вскоре вернусь и к контенту. Анонсы на неделю: 1. Сегодня вечером проведу с Александрой Ильиной лекцию по онтологическому аргументу в пользу бытия Бога. 2. Во вторник вечером проведу разговорный стрим с ответами на ваши философско-волкологические вопросы. 3. В среду вечером будет очная лекция в Москве по Эпикуру и гедонизму, поэтому приходите, если хотите увидеться ли…

custom 603960508776710527521custom 53820033193864205813🗿2

17 Oct 2026, 17:00 UTC≈5,940 views40 reactionsread 5 November 2026
Photo

Мы приглашаем всех искателей сакрального и любителей философии религии на новый курс! Выражая невыразимое: от истоков теизма 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 в 19.00мск. 2. Цена: 5000 руб за весь курс (60usd/55eur). 3. 9 онлайн-встреч (лекция с обсуждением). 4. Сложность: легко, популярно и …

custom 538200331938642058121custom 603960508776710527510custom 53821128968870430819

5 Oct 2026, 10:36 UTC≈2,350 views13 reactionsread 5 November 2026

Завершил восьмой месяц метафилософского клуба, в рамках которого мы с участниками разбирали теорию ошибок и моральную философию Иммануила Канта. Девятый месяц стартует в это воскресенье. Поэтому, если кто-то желает присоединиться - буду вас ждать! В октябре участники проголосовали за следующие темы: моральный нон-натуралистический реализм и плюралистическая деонтология Дэвида Росса. 🔻Я давно ждал эти темы и намере…

custom 53820033193864205818custom 60396050877671052755

25 Sept 2026, 06:48 UTC≈2,300 views32 reactionsread 5 November 2026

Никогда не лишне предостерегать от этой небрежности или даже низменного образа мыслей, при которых моральный принцип ищут среди эмпирических побудительных причин и законов; ведь человеческий разум, когда устает, охотно отдыхает на этом мягком ложе и в сладких обманчивых грезах. И подсовывает нравственности какого-то ублюдка, состряпанного из членов совершенно разного происхождения, который похож на все, что только в…

custom 603960508776710527532

24 Sept 2026, 09:19 UTC≈2,490 views33 reactions1 Starread 5 November 2026

Почему Кант строит свою этику на "чистом", а не "грязном" практическом разуме? Начав подготовку к клубной встрече по моральной философии Иммануила Канта, я заметил, что этика немецкого философа при первом приближении прямо противопоставлена традиции морального сентиментализма, представленной Дэвидом Юмом, Фрэнсисом Хатчесоном, Энтони Шефтсбери, Адамом Смитом и другими. ⏺И это обосновано: Кант прекрасно знал этих мы…

custom 603960508776710527515custom 538200331938642058110custom 53821128968870430818

17 Sept 2026, 16:15 UTC≈3,130 views29 reactionsread 5 November 2026

Диалогизм в экзистенциальной философии Мартина Бубера | Выпуск 7. Сезон 2. Второй сезон экзистенциального подкаста посвящён исследованию ключевых фигур, которые существенно повлияли на развитие экзистенциальной традиции. В седьмом выпуске мы рассмотрели экзистенциальные концепции Мартина Бубера, уделив внимание его различию между отношениями "Я-Ты" и "Я-Оно". Ведущие подкаста: Психотерапевт Александра Ларина. Филос…

custom 538200331938642058116custom 53821128968870430818custom 60396050877671052755

5 Sept 2026, 14:01 UTC≈2,890 views54 reactionsread 5 November 2026

36 (164). Кто не видит суетности мира, сам суетен. Но кто ее не видит? Разве что молодые люди, которые душой целиком в страстях, развлечениях и мыслях о будущем. Но отнимите у них развлечение - и вы увидите, что они умирают от тоски. Они смутно чувствуют свое ничтожество, не сознавая его; это большое несчастье - испытывать невыносимую скорбь, как только приходится задуматься о самом себе и ничем от этих мыслей не о…

custom 603960508776710527533custom 538211289688704308112custom 53820033193864205817🗿2

5 Sept 2026, 07:00 UTC≈2,680 views10 reactionsread 5 November 2026

Прошедший, седьмой месяц метафилософского клуба был посвящен моральной семантике и утилитаризму Джона Стюарта Милля. Первая тема оказалась объемной: пришлось рассмотреть не только спор когнитивистов с их оппонентами, но и различные нормативные категории, имеющие отношение к моральному дискурсу (благо, основание, обязательство, добродетель, уместность и т.д.). 🔻С Миллем получилось особенно интересно. Как и в прошлый…

custom 60396050877671052756custom 53820033193864205812custom 53821128968870430812

Showing the 12 most recent of 33 posts we hold for @luckystrikephilosophy. 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.

Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.

Posts edited after publishing

@luckystrikephilosophy edited 2 posts 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

Posts recorded as deleted after publishing

We recorded 3 posts on @luckystrikephilosophy as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.

A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.

First seen missing
7 August 2026
Most recent seen missing
12 August 2026
Median time before seen missing
4 days
Seen missing in the last 30 days
0

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.

22 Jul 2026, 08:03 UTCAnonymous Poll307 voters

Должна ли (в нормативном смысле) философия, с Вашей точки зрения, преследовать полезность, которая выходит за пределы ее области исследования и практики, подобно тому, как математика может быть полезна для физики, программирования или медицины?

  1. Верно, что философия обязана ориентироваться на благо (пользу), которое выходит за ее пределы.42%
  2. Неверно, что философия обязана ориентироваться на благо (пользу), которое выходит за ее пределы.44%
  3. Я не знаю // Я волк 🐺14%

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 33 most recent posts we hold, published 18 June 2026 to 4 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

Republishes

Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.

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 15 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.

4я книга Науки Логики
@starpear1724 · 22,214
Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 69 here — alongside 68 others — read 27 September 2026

This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list 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.

“Ставка Паскаля | Андрей Леман” (@luckystrikephilosophy), 5,934 subscribers as measured 5 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/luckystrikephilosophy.

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.