He actually argues quite the opposite in [1] (see footnote, pg 33) - a good read in itself. The quote you're probably referring to is this:
"a science is said to be
_useful_ if its development tends to accentuate the existing inequalities in the distribution of
wealth, or more directly promotes the destruction of human life" (emphasis mine).
And Hardy's response (excerpt):
> It is sometimes
suggested that pure mathematicians glory in the uselessness of
their work, and make it a boast that it has no practical applications.
> I am sure that Gauss’s
saying (if indeed it be his) has been rather crudely misinterpreted.
If the theory of numbers could be employed for any practical and
obviously honourable purpose, if it could be turned directly to the
furtherance of human happiness or the relief of human suffering,
as physiology and even chemistry can, then surely neither Gauss
nor any other mathematician would have been so foolish as to
decry or regret such applications.
"a science is said to be _useful_ if its development tends to accentuate the existing inequalities in the distribution of wealth, or more directly promotes the destruction of human life" (emphasis mine).
And Hardy's response (excerpt):
> It is sometimes suggested that pure mathematicians glory in the uselessness of their work, and make it a boast that it has no practical applications.
> I am sure that Gauss’s saying (if indeed it be his) has been rather crudely misinterpreted. If the theory of numbers could be employed for any practical and obviously honourable purpose, if it could be turned directly to the furtherance of human happiness or the relief of human suffering, as physiology and even chemistry can, then surely neither Gauss nor any other mathematician would have been so foolish as to decry or regret such applications.
[1] http://www.math.ualberta.ca/mss/misc/A%20Mathematician%27s%2...