 Philosophers such as Michael Friedman responded to Hempel’s concerns by noting that simply because there seems to be a psychological element to understanding it does not follow that understanding is merely subjective or up for grabs (Friedman 1974). After all, knowledge has a psychological element, in light of the belief condition, but few hold that knowledge is merely subjective or up for grabs. Others, such as Jaegwon Kim, argued that leaving considerations about understanding out of accounts of explanation was deeply mistaken (Kim 1994 [2010]). After all, Kim claimed, we desire to explain things because we want to understand them.