Yeah assuming you want motivating to never read another. If you are only going to read one philosopher you should probably read philosophy that's aimed at a general public rather than professional philosophers?

Tractatus > Zarathustra. My child should of course be 19.

Couldn't live with recommending anything else. Even Russell has too big flaws imo. Have to admit I don't know all the modern ones, should read up. The classics, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle unfortunately knew too little for being top relevant today.

That's partly why I choose Russell. It includes accessible reading on most of the rest of philosophy.

I can give you that. If my child wasn't up for the "real" stuff, I would prob think Russell would be the one. At least he was extremely smart and made easy reading. Gives a hint of what philosophy can be at its best.

Cut the complex bs and let the kid read basic simple philosophy (preferably some very modern author, ask the Philosophy people to tell you who, and if not just go for Bertrand Russell) and world literature and then heavy attack on math and sciences like there is no tomorrow (unless of course they naturally dont like these, then curse the universe for having kids lol and do your best in what comes next hoping to regret the curse).

They will then be the philosopher (based on their own scientific thinking of the world and society) and they shouldnt read the others at all ever until they are very old to have formed personal well thought opinions and then read the others for enrichment and reflection. But hell no, never allow them the audacity to shape your kid's future thinking which should be founded instead on overall cultural exposure, life lessons, extensive world literature and of course above all else natural sciences and math and be a product of their own natural growth as thinkers. This is how you win. You want the kid to a be a scientist and then as a bonus a philosopher as it always should be for a great thinker.

Philosophy ought to be for the things that science has yet to answer (or hasnt exactly answered very convincingly yet or are complex enough to have an easy answer) based on what science has already answered or thinks it has answered.

Russell did the real stuff as well.

He didn't got much in for the non-analytical stuff or astrology, homeopathy etc.

Actually a good point. If you with "very old" mean 20-35.

Russel was one of the defining philosophers of the 20th century, just because he wanted to be able to be read by people outside of professional philosophy doesn't mean he didn't do the real stuff.

Russell is a wise choice, for reasons given above, and including his breadth of writings, which includes a bias lawyer's brief on other important western philosophers.

You could just hand your 13-year child The Analects of Confucius and see how much they flounder. It's the least they deserve.

But was the real stuff good enough? I mean, we are talking about "the one" here.

My potential, never to happen, child only deserves the best

For the purposes of this exercise, the more points of intersection with over-all human condition the better, at least in my book. Why I went with a poetic philosopher best known for a book about living which can be read in one sitting.

nietzsche
why am i such a wise parent???

You think Nietzsche is easier?

At least he's not better.

Russell would have been my choice but if thats taken Hume

Hell yea. So far I'm not seeing any Eastern philosophy in the mix.

Zeno. Not that slacker from antiquity, our Zeno

Russell and Wittgenstein can be derived by a moderately smart child from James.

Hume is awesome if you want your child to believe that intellect trumps reality.

Heraclitus.

No, Lao Tzu. He should first learn how not to think before learning how to think.

Benatar is the best possible answer. Accompany the mandatory nightly Benatar readings with the most doting of upbringings. That way, he learns to appreciate the concept of cognitive dissonance before anyone else in the history of this species. What an enigmatically precocious one you spawned there, sir/madam. He can pass all the kindergarten exams on day one, but at the same time, he exhibits a strangely well-developed capacity for self-loathing.

Man, I'm already becoming attached to this imaginary child of mine.

Theodor Geisel
No competition.

Elon Musk

Jubal Harshaw is a great philosopher for a teen in this spot. The fact he is a fictional character is all the better. Plus his book comes with more thought experiments than an acid trip.

He did not go to space, nor seemed to care much for guns. He may still live forever.

That is the way of The Master.

Jean Baudrillard, just to see what happens.

Kant would be an interesting choice, there are worse ones.

Really? Do you have a list?