From Into the Wild, was Chris courageous or stupid?

This question is entirely a matter of personal opinion.
Jon Krakauer claims to have tried to treat Chris as objectively as possible; he admits
to personal bias and shows that Chris failed to properly prepare himself for the
struggle of living in the wild. Krakauer notes in the
introduction:

readability="11">

Some readers admired the boy immensely for his
courage and noble ideals; others [thought] that he was a reckless idiot, a wacko, a
narcissist who perished out of arrogance and stupidity -- and was undeserving of the
considerable media attention he received.
(Krakauer, Into the
Wild,
Amazon.com)

Most opinions
concerning Chris are based in judging his actions; was he correct to cut his family off
from correspondence? Was he correct to refuse emotional connections with others? Was he
correct to pit himself with little training and gear against the Alaskan wilderness?
More importantly, were his goals and ideals worth the potential cost of his own life?
Only Chris could have answered those questions, and only from a position of experience
and hindsight; today, interpretations of his life are entirely
subjective.

In the end, Chris made decisions and they cost
him his life; his courage or stupidity (circumstantial stupidity, since he was very
smart otherwise) is less important than the lessons the reader learns from reading about
his life.