✅ تحلیلگران «این هفته تمام است»؛ تحلیل یا آرزو فروشی سهند ایرانمهر تماشا در یوتیوب 🌐 کانال پارادوکس: 🆔 @paradoxizer 〰️
👏2
Signed Kaveh khosravani

Channel
@paradoxizer
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
7,418subscribers
-58 since we began measuring on 5 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001426470403 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @paradoxizer |
| Description | نوشتهها، ترجمهها، و گزیدههای کاوه خسروانی آیدی برای تهیهی کتابها: @adm_paradox |
| Created | Between 1 April 2019 and 30 September 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 28 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 10 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 28 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/paradoxizer |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 28 Aug 2026, 09:18 | 7,418 | -16 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 05:48 | 7,434 | -10 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 11:42 | 7,444 | -13 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 00:11 | 7,457 | -7 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 02:09 | 7,464 | -9 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 15:44 | 7,473 | -2 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 19:21 | 7,475 | +1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 11:00 | 7,474 | -2 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 03:07 | 7,476 | no change |
| 5 Aug 2026, 22:26 | 7,476 | first reading |
40 posts held, back to 9 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 15 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
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. It is computed over the 22 of 25 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 28 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 40 (9 July 2026 – 28 August 2026) |
| Views total | 34,246 |
| Reactions total | 366 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 28 Aug 2026, 23:16 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 28 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
Measured directly from 1 video 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.
800 reactions across 34 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 82.3% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 658 | 82.3% | |
| 👎 | 86 | 10.8% | |
| 👌 | 20 | 2.50% | |
| 👏 | 17 | 2.13% | |
| 🖕 | 9 | 1.13% | |
| 🔥 | 7 | 0.875% | |
| 😐 | 2 | 0.25% | |
| 🤔 | 1 | 0.125% |
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 35 of the 40 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 812reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 40 most recent posts we hold, published 9 July 2026 to 28 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.
✅ تحلیلگران «این هفته تمام است»؛ تحلیل یا آرزو فروشی سهند ایرانمهر تماشا در یوتیوب 🌐 کانال پارادوکس: 🆔 @paradoxizer 〰️
👏2
Signed Kaveh khosravani
آیا با این بخش از این متن موافقید: توجه به نقش منافع شخصی صرفاً یک جور کنجکاوی روانشناختی یا دقت غیرلازم نیست، بلکه «شرط فهم» است؛ شرط فهم بسیاری از موضعگیریهای سیاسی
The shares total 102%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Signed Kaveh khosravani
✅ فرماندهان نشسته در چادر امن فرماندهی؛ از بدیهیاتی که بهراحتی فراموش میشوند 1️⃣ راز بسیاری از موضعگیریهای سیاسی، اگر هم در منافع شخصیِ تعریفشده و مشخص و خودآگاه نباشد در منافع پنهان یا ناخودآگاه است. این را تقریباً همه میدانند اما به نظر میرسد آنچنان که شایسته است در مرکز توجه قرار نمیدهند و درنتیجه نیاز به تکرار و یادآوری دارد. 2️⃣ سالهاست معتقدم روانشناسی اخلاق از بنیادیترین حوزههای دانش انسانیست و آ…
👍7
Signed Kaveh khosravani
یورگن هابرماس فیلسوف آلمانی و از متفکران مهم معاصر در سنت نظریه انتقادی است که پروژه فکری او بر عقلانیت ارتباطی، گفتوگو و امکان اخلاق و دموکراسی در جهان مدرنِ سکولار متمرکز است. هابرماس برخلاف بدبینی رادیکال نسبت به عقل، میکوشد شکل تازهای از عقلانیت را احیا کند؛ عقلانیتی که نه ابزاری و سلطهگر، بلکه گفتوگویی و بینالاذهانی است. در مرکز اندیشه هابرماس، مفهوم اخلاق گفتمانی (Discourse Ethics) قرار دارد. از نظر او، …
👌1
Signed Kaveh khosravani
✅ از صرفهجویی شناختی تا خساست شناختی 📕 ذهن انسان برای اندیشیدن منابع محدودی دارد. ما نمیتوانیم دربارهی همهچیز با دقت و موشکافی فکر کنیم؛ بنابراین برای کاهش هزینهی شناختی، اغلب به میانبرهای ذهنی، عادتها و قواعد ساده متوسل میشویم: به تجربههای قبلی اعتماد میکنیم، از نظر اکثریت پیروی میکنیم، به کلیشهها تکیه میکنیم، چیزهای آشنا را درستتر از چیزهای ناآشنا میپنداریم و گاهی از یک ویژگی یا تجربهی محدود، دربار…
👍5
Signed Kaveh khosravani
✅ دربارهی اینکه «نوشته» چیزی برای «خواندن» است 📕 یواش یواش دارم به این نتیجه میرسم که برخی افراد در شبکههای اجتماعی اساساً به چیزی به اسم «خواندن» نوشتهها قبل از قضاوت دربارهی آنها اعتقاد ندارند. مطلب را «نمیخوانند» بلکه فقط «بو میکشند». اگر بو بکشند که کاملاً موافق نظرشان است و خشمشان را ارضا میکند که هیچ؛ اما اگر چنین بویی احساس نکنند، بلافاصله یک برداشت نادرست و گاه کاملاً بیربط را جایگزین «مطلب واقعی»…
👍18👌4
Signed Kaveh khosravani
✅ #ابیات_محبوب دولت آن است که بی خون دل آید به کنار ورنه با سعی و عمل باغ جنان اینهمه نیست. __ حافظ [یکی از محبوبترین ابیاتم. گرچه عملاً پیروش نیستم. ولی بههرحال اسم اینجا هم «پارادوکس» است!] 🌐 کانال پارادوکس: 🆔 @paradoxizer
👍11🔥1
Signed Kaveh khosravani
✅ هولوکاستِ ترامپ؛ کسی بوی اجساد زنده را حس نمیکند؟ 📕 در جریان غالب فرهنگی، به هر سوراخسنبهای سرک بکشی نشانهای از هولوکاست و محکومیت هیتلر و آشوویتس و ... میبینی. یک بار بهطعنه به یکی از دوستانم میگفتم یادم نمیآید آخرین بار، کِی فیلمی دیدم که مربوط به هولوکاست و یهودستیزی نبوده است. از فیلمها تا کتابها، انگار مأمور شدهاند خاطرهی مظلومیت یهودیان را زنده نگه دارند و، پیآمدش، زمینه را برای چسباندن انگ «یه…
👍51👎14👏2
Signed Kaveh khosravani
💢 سکس، دروغ، و ناکامی 🔰 برگرفته از کتاب چگونه دربارهی سکس بیشتر بیندیشیم نوشته آلن دوباتن، ترجمه کاوه خسروانی ✅ در بیشتر رابطهها، هر دو طرف مجبورند دربارهی امیالشان دروغ بگویند تا شانس موفقیتآمیزبودنِ رابطه از دست نرود. جِن (زن داستان ما) باید حواساش باشد فاش نکند که علاقهاش به توماس (مرد داستان) صرفاً جنسی است و توماس نیز، از ترس آنکه مبادا جن بترسد و بهسرعت ترکش کند، نمیتواند رؤیای عشقی که در سر دارد را …
👌6👍2
Signed Kaveh khosravani
✅ #ابیات_محبوب جهان به مجلسِ مستانِ بیخِرد مانَد که در شکنجه بُوَد هر کسی که هُشیار است به مجمعی که فتادی بساز با یاران که در نماز جماعت شتاب بیکار است __ صائب تبریزی 🌐 کانال پارادوکس: 🆔 @paradoxizer
👍14👎1
Signed Kaveh khosravani
✅ نویسنده [و مترجم] همچون دختری در معرض فروش خویش ✍🏻 سورن کرکگور 📕 اینکه ناشرانی وجود دارند، اینکه کسانی هستند که سراسر وجودشان چیزی جز این نیست که کتاب را کالا و نویسنده را فروشنده بدانند، وضعیتی یکسره غیراخلاقی است. تا آنجا که جنبهی مالیِ کار – یعنی دریافت دستمزد، حقالتألیف و مانند اینها – به امری معنوی، مانند نویسنده بودن، راه پیدا میکند، کسی که عهدهدار جنبهی معنوی کار است باید خود جنبهی مالی آن را نیز بر …
👌3🤔1
Signed Kaveh khosravani
✅ متن پشت جلد کتاب «مغالطههای پرکاربرد» |ریچارد پل و لیندا الدر | ترجمه: کاوه خسروانی | نشر نایش 📕 «فریب» بخشی از زندگی روزمرۀ انسانهاست. ما فریب میدهیم و فریب میخوریم؛ راست را دروغ و دروغ را راست جلوه میدهیم. جالب اینجاست که خیلی وقتها حتی خودمان را هم فریب میدهیم و حقیقت را برای خودمان هم واژگونه میکنیم. 📕 یکی از مهمترین ابزارهای ما برای این خودفریبیها و دیگرفریبیها «مغالطه» است. به استدلالهای نادرستی …
👍3
Signed Kaveh khosravani
Showing the 12 most recent of 40 posts we hold for @paradoxizer. 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.
The 5 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
آیا با این بخش از این متن موافقید: توجه به نقش منافع شخصی صرفاً یک جور کنجکاوی روانشناختی یا دقت غیرلازم نیست، بلکه «شرط فهم» است؛ شرط فهم بسیاری از موضعگیریهای سیاسی
The shares total 102%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
اگر هدف، تأمین منافع مردم ایران باشد، جنگی با مشخصاتی که در این چند ماه دیدیم، اصلاً «راه» نیست که بخواهیم دربارهی «راه اول» یا «راه آخر» بودنش بحث کنیم
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
✅ با این دیدگاه موافقید یا مخالف؟: در حال حاضر، مردم هیچ نقشی در تحولات سیاسی ندارند و بنابراین کوشش در جهت افزایش آگاهیهای خودمان و دیگران بیفایده است.
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
با توجه به تعریف «بیشفعالی اخلاقی» در پست قبل، به نظر شما «بیشفعالی اخلاقی» میتواند برآیندهای سیاسی داشته باشد؟
Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
در صورتی که نظام سیاسی مطلوب و مورداعتماد شما در کشور حکمفرما باشد، کدام گزینه را جهت ارتباط با هموطنانتان ترجیح میدهید؟
The shares total 103%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not 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 40 most recent posts we hold, published 9 July 2026 to 28 August 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.
Citation-graph rank — 74,679 of 1,626,711entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
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.
Named by 11 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.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
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 28 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“پارادوکس” (@paradoxizer), 7,418 subscribers as measured 28 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/paradoxizer.
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.