I think that people are going to respond based on their worldview.
Some people have the worldview that life's purpose is defined by something outside of humanity. That this purpose is objective.
Other people have the worldview that society and the social contract create life's purpose.
Still others believe that there is no purpose in life except that purpose which the individual sets for himself or herself.
There are probably other worldviews but these three examples can be used to illustrate the point that I am trying to make.
A person that thinks that the third example is the correct way to look at life is not going to find anything at all wrong Alex Honnold's decision to free solo.
A person with the second view may think that he was not being fair to the other people in his life.
A person with the first view may (depending on what he thinks life's objective purpose is) feel that Alex Honnold engaged in something which was futile and meaningless.
The point that I am trying to make is that different people are going to respond to this question differently based upon the fundamental assumptions of what they think a person is supposed to do with his life.
Philosophical Idealism speaks of standing up for what is ideal even when the majority oppose you. But others believe that popular opinion is the definition of appropriateness.
Since there is a diversity of viewpoints, even answers that are similar in consequence may vary in motivation.