Are you also interested in other school of philosophy? Which ones?(e.g. epicureanism, etc..)
For example, in the context of HN: although I often find the content here inspiring, it can also be intimidating and discouraging. When I read about software engineers making $200k+, five times what I make, it makes me feel as though I've failed, or that I'm not cut out for the profession. Similarly, when I see the amazing projects, startups, and other technical achievements here, I often feel discouraged because I don't feel like I'll ever achieve that.
Stoicism focuses on what you have, not what you want. Negative visualization teaches us to appreciate the present: What if I lost the job I have? What if I lost my wife, my family? What if I'm badly injured and can't work at all? In that context, I can appreciate my job, even if it's not as good a job as I want. After all, I get paid enough to cover my bills, to sit in a squishy chair and think and solve puzzles. This helps relieve the anxiety I generate by foolishly measuring my self-worth by the yardstick of others' achievements. Ironically, this doesn't rob me of my ambition to improve my lot. Instead, I find that when I am calm and content, I have the energy and focus to do the studying and practice that I believe are necessary to do so. And most importantly: in the meantime, I've given myself permission to be happy today, not on the day in the future when I reach the ever-moving goalposts. Just as you would "bus-proof" a software development effort, you'll benefit from bus-proofing your happiness by appreciating what you have today.
I can relate to how HN can make you feel -- i just find it interesting how some people can deal with such feelings with ease without having to resort to reading books on life philosophy. I envy those people :)
The thing most resonates with me in stoicism is the fatalistic outlook. Everything that happens, has already happened and will continue to happen. Eases my anxiety.
The negative visualization described in the book is also a powerful technique. It puts one's petty problems into perspective and actually makes you grateful for things you have.
Overall, I think the central idea of it is the ability to feel joy - something that can be derived from the state of tranquility rather than pleasure of the senses. And of course, to treat other people to the best of your abilities and at the same time acknowledging how flawed beings we are.
“If you do the task before you always adhering to strict reason with zeal and energy and yet with humanity, disregarding all lesser ends and keeping the divinity within you pure and upright, as though you were even now faced with its recall - if you hold steadily to this, staying for nothing and shrinking from nothing, only seeking in each passing action a conformity with nature and in each word and utterance a fearless truthfulness, then the good life shall be yours. And from this course no man has the power to hold you back.”
There is nothing fatalistic about that. Marcus Aurelius didn't sit on his hands and wait for the world to go by, he went out and fought for what he believed in.
Stoicism is acceptance of difficulty, not acceptance of fate; acceptance of what you cannot change but demanding of effort where you can make a difference.
Stoicism is a call to action in the here and now, not a cosy belief in reward in the afterlife:
"In death, Alexander of Macedon’s end differed no whit from his stable-boy’s. Either both were received into the same generative principle of the universe, or both alike were dispersed into atoms." (Book Six, 24)
See also a blog from my alma mater: http://blogs.exeter.ac.uk/stoicismtoday/what-is-stoicism/.
http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011/10/02/what-is-stoicism-a...
The way it works is that when you notice feelings of guilt (or any other negative emotion for that matter) you immediately redefine the situation to clearly explain to yourself why you did something (that you feel guilty about) and why it was the right thing for you to do.
The end result of it is higher self-esteem, ability to see things as they are and apparently more compassion toward others.
If you don't have a reasons to feel guilty you don't need to make others feel guilty to cover your own crap.
Another side of my practice is instead of "getting rid of negativity" you make it irrelevant by acting as if you already as positive and as happy as you want to be.
That article led me to Epictetus' The Enchiridion, which was an easy way to start learning more. There's a free version at Gutenberg.org: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/45109/45109-h/45109-h.htm
That could of course just be Russell's positivist bias speaking through, of course. I really ought to read some of the actual sources sometime.
