In reply to alpinechris:
I solo a fair bit. I don't think its particularly worthy of aspiration OR an unjustifiable risk. It's a mode of climbing that some people prefer more than others. As other people have said.
It's difficult to draw a line in risk between, say, soloing some Vdiff with lots of gear and, say, "leading" any of the E5-and-up protectionless hard technical routes that there are regularly news items about.
Obviously the argument would be that the latter is "riskier" - which in my view it is - but no-one appears to start threads about it.
Some people like rock climbing, and don't mind too much about whether the grade is a personal best or its technically hard for them. They are likely to be natural soloists. I'll admit that not having to worry about ropes, gear, hanging around on belay for an hour, etc, is very liberating.
Equally, others may be of the view that the safety net of a rope is mandatory for them. That's fine too. These may be people who are pushing grade, or simply like to feel relaxed that their death is probably not on the cards.
When I'm soloing, I never think that I am risking my life, I never think that the next move could be my last, bucause it doesn't bother me. I climb in this little bubble where its all total concentration and the next move.
And yes, I could slip and fall to my doom, but I could do that on a high-graded protectionless route, or a low graded route I didn't bother to put much gear in (I think most of us are semi-guilty of this), or simply a route with spaced gear - e.g. Brown's Eliminate has claimed a few lives. Or I could slip at the top, or on the descent route.
Personally, my question would be "When you get to the top of the route and all you can see is 10m of wet grass at a 45 degree angle and crumbling earth steps hacked into the slope do you consider its an unjustifiable risk and want to lower off your last bit of gear?" But how many of us will pick our way up the slope to the salvation of the tree at the top?