This is highly subjective. It's worth phrasing it as such.

>Imagine summiting the highest mountain, while being physically carried, as being socially acceptable and widespread. is it to a benefit or to a harm for the idea of summiting?

It is lame and sucks, but it isnt corruption, right?

They are corrupting the sport of alpinism.

Modern alpinism, as pioneered by the likes of Messner, is quite recent. Heck Norgay and Hillary were among the first travelling light, everyone else before them had expeditions rooted in colonial tradition. Compared to those, people being carrid up Mt. Everest are actually travelling eith almost nothing. And they manage to get up that summit, by paying Sherpas more than anyone else before that.

Not defend the practice, it is pathetic, but it is hardly corruption since it is clear people being carried up hardly qualify as alpinists to begin with.