Here's my opinion, it may be wrong, or right, or somewhere in between:
Perfect chess is boring. Ultimately, chess is a game of objectivity. It's a science more than an art. Magnus Carlsen is possibly closer than anyone else has been to perfecting the science of chess.
It's why Tal is my favorite player. He (amongst others) showed that chess was an art as well. You can be creative and beautiful and wild and still compete with the best. But I have to admit that any perfectly correct chess player could beat any artistic chess player. I think that's just how the game is, and that's how to truly be the best.
/shrug
+ 1
Carslen to me proves that being perfect, being the best, being the number 1, winning all the time just isn't the Holy Grail.
No he doesn't inspire me.