[AdieuToLogic]

> I don’t really understand why so much of science is funded by the government instead of by private philanthropy.

Two reasons.

First, private philanthropy is neither sustainable nor sufficient in scope.

Second, because government funded science is free from having to produce immediate results in order to satisfy the whims of a specific patron such that funding is continued.

> It seems like an obvious channel for corruption of science.

Yes, relying on private entities to fund scientific research does seem like an obvious channel for corruption.

[derbOac]

> Second, because government funded science is free from having to produce immediate results in order to satisfy the whims of a specific patron such that funding is continued.

I agree with you but there's irony (and a possible lesson about motives) in the current situation.

[rjbwork]

Well, hundreds of elected representatives and a handful of judges have had to entirely abdicate their responsibility and power for us to arrive at this point. It's not just one guy.

[derbOac]

Sadly true and the real mystery for me.

The problem and paradox is that it's hundreds of elected representatives and a handful of judges entirely abdicating their responsibility to make it just one guy.

[AdieuToLogic]

>> Second, because government funded science is free from having to produce immediate results in order to satisfy the whims of a specific patron such that funding is continued.

> I agree with you but there's irony (and a possible lesson about motives) in the current situation.

Quite true, sadly.

I am reminded of an old adage[0]:

  In theory there is no difference between theory and
  practice, while in practice there is.

0 - https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/04/14/theory/