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 10 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 83% 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
59 measurements spanning 89 days, net +968. 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 15,909–17,261 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 59
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
3 Nov 2026, 18:50
17,095
+5
1 Nov 2026, 17:06
17,090
+1
31 Oct 2026, 18:41
17,089
-16
30 Oct 2026, 15:04
17,105
+3
29 Oct 2026, 18:00
17,102
+123
28 Oct 2026, 17:56
16,979
+3
27 Oct 2026, 17:28
16,976
+2
26 Oct 2026, 16:57
16,974
-9
25 Oct 2026, 15:06
16,983
+11
24 Oct 2026, 17:59
16,972
-4
23 Oct 2026, 19:16
16,976
+1
22 Oct 2026, 20:46
16,975
-19
21 Oct 2026, 20:30
16,994
-6
20 Oct 2026, 17:28
17,000
-4
19 Oct 2026, 18:07
17,004
-4
18 Oct 2026, 16:01
17,008
-7
17 Oct 2026, 16:40
17,015
+1
16 Oct 2026, 19:07
17,014
-17
15 Oct 2026, 21:05
17,031
+132
14 Oct 2026, 19:11
16,899
first reading
Engagement
68 posts held, back to 17 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 59 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
17.5%
avg views ÷ 17,095 subscribers
Avg views / post
3,000
20 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.34%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
20
of 68 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
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 2 November 2026
Posts held
68 (17 July 2026 – 2 November 2026)
Views total
59,980
Reactions total
804
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
3 Nov 2026, 15:49 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
17m 22s
Average length
1m 44s
Measured directly from 10 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
2,461 reactions across 66 posts, in 14 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 43.0% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
1,058
43.0%
👍
670
27.2%
👏
208
8.45%
🔥
155
6.30%
👌
125
5.08%
🙏
104
4.23%
❤🔥
32
1.30%
😢
31
1.26%
🕊
26
1.06%
💊
23
0.935%
🤔
13
0.528%
😍
11
0.447%
🤯
4
0.163%
👎
1
0.041%
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 66 of the 68 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 2,461 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 68 most recent posts we hold, published 17 July 2026 to 2 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.
فردریش نیچه در کتاب تبارشناسی اخلاق درباره انسانهای ضعیف میگه که ضعف خود را فضیلت، و فرومایگیِ آمیخته با ترس را تواضع مینامند.
و سعدی شیرازی در وصف این جماعت میفرماید
تواضع ز گردنفرازان نکوست
گدا گر تواضع کند خوی اوست
🎙محمد عینیزاده
https://t.me/mohammad_eynizadeh
♻️ در باب خسیس بودن
خسیس بودن یک رفتار اضطرابی-وسواسی است.
فرد خسیس به علت احساس ناامنی روانی که داره، ذخیرهسازی میکنه.
مثلاً هیچ چیز کهنه و حتی از کار افتادهای رو دور نمیندازه، چونکه معتقده که هرچه که خار آید، روزی به کار آید...
و چونکه نگرانه که نکنه بعداً گرفتار بشم، پول خرج نمیکنه.
حتی اگر پول داشته باشه در عالم رفاقت همیشه کمتر از رفقا خرج میکنه، خیلی به خودش نمیرسه، و در رابطه عاطفی چندان اهل هدیه دادن، …
در جایی یک ضربالمثل اسپانیایی خواندم که میگه: تاریکترین لحظهی شب، لحظهی قبل از طلوع آفتاب است.
در واقع داره امید میبخشه که ممکنه در اوج ظلماتِ زندگی، گشایش حاصل بشه... پس به بهتر شدن اوضاع امیدوار باشیم.
به نظرم این جمله در مواردی میتونه درست باشه، اما ناقص است.
چونکه در آن روی سکه میتونه: روشنترین لحظهی روز، لحظهی قبل از غروب آفتاب باشه... پس مراقب باشیم.
به عبارتی اگر واقعبین باشیم، لازمه در وضعیت و مو…
لازمه یه توضیحی در مورد فایل بالا بدم.
هدف از این بازی اینه که کودک به مزه خوراکی عادت کنه، نه اینکه همش در بازی غذا بخوره یا قرار نیست هروقت کودک خوب غذا میخورد، تشویق کنید.
اصلا برای غذا خوردن نباید پاداش و جایزه بدهید یا حتی به نوعی نشان بدهید که از این قضیه خیلی خوشحالید! چون در این صورت کودک یاد میگیرد با خوردن یا نخوردن غذا رفتار شما را کنترل کند.
غذا خوردن کار خارقالعاده یا کاری که مستوجب تشویق و پاداش با…
🔺تعلیم و تربیت فرزند
🔻پاداشدهی -- بازی
♻️ یکی از روشهای غذا دادن به کودکانی که غذا نمیخورند، روش پاداشدهی در بازی است.
نکته، بهترین زمان غذا خوردن کودک، زمانی است که گرسنه هستند. به زور غذا خوروندن به بچه، اشتباه است.
✅ روانشناسی نقاد
https://t.me/mohammad_eynizadeh
✅ در حوزهی روانشناسی پرسشتان را در کانال مطرح بفرمایید.
▪️پرسش و پاسخ کوتاه، به منزله حل مسئله نیست، بلکه صرفاً در جهت آدرس علمی است.
🔗 لطفاً تا لحظهی پاسخگویی صبور باشید.
https://t.me/mohammad_eynizadeh
ما فقیر شدهایم. یکی پس از دیگری، بخشی از میراث بشری را واگذار کردهایم و اغلب آن را به بهای یکصدم ارزش واقعیاش، نزد گروگذار گذاشتهایم؛ در ازای پول خردِ «امر معاصر». بحران اقتصادی پشت در است و سایه جنگی قریبالوقوع در پس آن دیده میشود.
حفظ داشتهها به انحصار گروهی اندک از قدرتمندان درآمده است؛ کسانی که خدا میداند انسانیتر از دیگران نیستند و اغلب، به شیوهای نهچندان پسندیده، بربرترند. دیگران ناچارند خود را سازگ…
♻️ اصطلاح شناسی روانشناسی
▪️شناختدرمانی: رویکردی برای اصلاح افکار و باورهای ناکارآمد.
▪️رفتاردرمانی: رویکردی برای اصلاح و تغییر رفتارهای ناسازگار.
▪️رواندرمانی: فرایند حرفهای کمک به بهبود مشکلات روانشناختی.
▪️اعتماددرمانی: رابطه همکاری و اعتماد میان درمانگر و مراجع.
▪️بینش: درک عمیق فرد از افکار احساسات و رفتار خود.
▪️انتقال: بازآفرینی احساسات گذشته در رابطه با درمانگر.
▪️خودافشایی: بیان اطلاعات یا تجربهه…
آن پدر ناکسم بود که سَرَم را برید
مادر بدکارهام بود که مرا خورد
و آن دیوانه، خواهر کوچکم، استخوانهای مرا در جایی نمور و سرد انداخت
و من پرنده قشنگی شدم که پرواز میکنم
پر! پر! پر!
✍ یوهان ولفگانگ فون گوته
📗 فاوست
هیچ سنت و اعتقادی، مقدستر از جان انسان نیست.
قتلهای ناموسی ننگی بر پیشانی جامعهای است که در برابر تعصب کور، سکوت میکند.
✅ روانشناسی نقاد
https://t.me/mohammad_eynizadeh
افلاطون میگه هرچقدر که قوا را بیشتر کنید، اگر در جهت زیست درست نباشید، نتیجه مثبت حاصل نخواهد شد.
مثل این میمونه به کسی بگیم این کلاغ پشت سرت رو میبینی؟
اما به جلو نگاه کنه.
اینبار از عینک استفاده کنه، موفق نشه، با دقت بیشتر دوربین بیاره، باز موفق نشه، حتی از تلسکوپ استفاده کنه....
غافل از اینکه کلاغ در پشت سرش قرار داره و لازمه جهت درست رو نگاه کنه.
در زندگی معمولی نیز همینطوره.
ممکنه دانش، هوش، قدرتِ تحلیل و مه…
تا چه اندازه به باورهایی مانند طالعبینی، دعانویسی، چشمزخم و پیشگویی آینده اعتقاد دارید؟
۱. اعتقاد زیادی دارم و این باورها را در زندگی جدی میگیرم.5%
۲. تا حدودی اعتقاد دارم، اما درباره درستی آنها تردید دارم.14%
۳. اعتقاد چندانی ندارم و برای پذیرفتن آنها شواهد بیشتری لازم میدانم.20%
۴. به این باورها اعتقاد ندارم؛ چونکه هیچ شواهد علمی معتبر و قابلبررسی برای آنها وجود ندارد.61%
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
❤14🤯1
Signed محمد عینیزاده
Showing the 12 most recent of 68 posts we hold for @mohammad_eynizadeh. 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
@mohammad_eynizadeh 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
11 August 2026
Most recent edit
11 August 2026
Posts recorded as deleted after publishing
We recorded 11 posts on @mohammad_eynizadeh 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
2 September 2026
Median time before seen missing
6 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.
تا چه اندازه به باورهایی مانند طالعبینی، دعانویسی، چشمزخم و پیشگویی آینده اعتقاد دارید؟
۱. اعتقاد زیادی دارم و این باورها را در زندگی جدی میگیرم.5%
۲. تا حدودی اعتقاد دارم، اما درباره درستی آنها تردید دارم.14%
۳. اعتقاد چندانی ندارم و برای پذیرفتن آنها شواهد بیشتری لازم میدانم.20%
۴. به این باورها اعتقاد ندارم؛ چونکه هیچ شواهد علمی معتبر و قابلبررسی برای آنها وجود ندارد.61%
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 68 most recent posts we hold, published 17 July 2026 to 2 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
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 4 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.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
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.
پرسونا @psychology_personaa · 20,532 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 29 September 2026
بنیاد مرهم 🫀 Marham Foundation @Marham_Foundation · 18,457 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 4 October 2026
فلسفه ™️ @Phiilosophiy · 22,455 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 76 here — alongside 75 others — read 24 September 2026
فلسفه اگزیستانسیالیسم و روانکاوی @phenomenology_existentialism · 19,449 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 4 October 2026
دیالکتیک علمی @ScientificDialectics · 23,691 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 16 September 2026
غلط ننویسیم @ghalatnanevisimm · 21,393 Telegram ranks this channel #14 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 25 September 2026
Ego ideal @EgoideaI · 21,649 Telegram ranks this channel #14 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 24 September 2026
انبارستان🎧 @anbar100 · 29,436 Telegram ranks this channel #15 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 9 September 2026
علاقمندان به «دکتر آذرخش مکری» @azarakhsh_mokrii · 24,500 Telegram ranks this channel #16 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 21 September 2026
vkends | مجله ایدهها @vkends · 24,567 Telegram ranks this channel #16 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 15 September 2026
یافتههای نوین روانشناختی @Hrman11 · 23,956 Telegram ranks this channel #18 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 18 September 2026
🕊 فرازتد⚡️(روشنگری) @FarazTed · 20,869 Telegram ranks this channel #26 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 26 September 2026
فلسفه @Philosophy3 · 43,206 Telegram ranks this channel #29 of 64 here — alongside 63 others — read 5 October 2026
خلاصهی فلاسفه @Arts1992 · 19,714 Telegram ranks this channel #32 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 29 September 2026
فلسفه و جامعهشناسی @Philosophy_files · 31,074 Telegram ranks this channel #32 of 80 here — alongside 79 others — read 8 September 2026
Spirit_and_life_ | روانشناسی تحلیلی یونگ @Spirit_and_life · 39,548 Telegram ranks this channel #36 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 1 September 2026
تاریخ فلسفه با ابوذر شریعتی @abouzar_shariatii · 32,311 Telegram ranks this channel #37 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 4 September 2026
مدرسه علوم انسانی @zistboommedia · 32,651 Telegram ranks this channel #43 of 99 here — alongside 98 others — read 5 September 2026
کتاب خانه جامع 📚 @KetabTOpdf · 63,416 Telegram ranks this channel #49 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 22 August 2026
Kierkegaard | کییرکگارد @kierkegaard3 · 19,016 Telegram ranks this channel #50 of 76 here — alongside 75 others — read 4 October 2026
کتابخانه معاصر @Mser_12 · 28,457 Telegram ranks this channel #56 of 75 here — alongside 74 others — read 8 September 2026
استخدام روانشناسی ومشاوره کشور @psy_estekhdami · 23,314 Telegram ranks this channel #57 of 76 here — alongside 75 others — read 18 September 2026
مصطفی ملکیان @mostafamalekian · 65,781 Telegram ranks this channel #72 of 99 here — alongside 98 others — read 21 August 2026
نیچه و فلسفه / Theodor @PHILOSOPHI_ZER · 33,156 Telegram ranks this channel #81 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 4 September 2026
This channel appears in 25 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. 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 3 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“روانشناسی نقاد” (@mohammad_eynizadeh), 17,095 subscribers as measured 3 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/mohammad_eynizadeh.
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.