There is an implicit agreement that mathematics is funded, for the most part by the public, as a way to advance the state of knowledge and propagate (even if very indirectly) what has learned for the public good.
It was never about helping individual mathematicians demonstrate that they are individually good at math. It happened to work out that way, but it wasn't the goal.
I've been wondering if mathematics is going to go the way of particle physics in that it will start to take a lot of money to make advancements.
Agree, my comment is rather about the fact that most work you do in school and (lower) university is not itself of interest, rather the purpose is to work out your brain. The more of your exercise you leave to the forklift, the steeper the cliff will be when you find a weight that doesn’t fit on forks. (That is, unless/until machines get good enough to completely replace people, at which point we have another few problems on hand, such as day-to-day purpose and justification of existence)
This is a good metaphor for treating the means as an end, thanks. And I agree with your parent comment that that is largely the misalignment that Terence is pointing out.