 Relatedly, Alison Hills characterizes the distinctive psychological abilities that undergird understanding in terms of “cognitive control” (Hills 2016). For example, Hills claims that in order to understand why it is right to give money to charity, it is not enough to simply believe the proposition that it is right to give money to charity because we owe assistance to the very needy (Hills 2016: 669), because I could accept a “because” claim along these lines on the basis of testimony while having only a very dim sense of how the two ingredient claims (that it is right to give money and we owe assistance to the very needy) are related. What is needed in addition is an appreciation of the relationship between these two claims. And what this involves, according to the cognitive control view, is an ability to “manipulate” the things standing in relationship: for example, to be able to make a variety of inferences in light of the relationship (Hills 2016: 663).