 Despite the efforts of Friedman, Kim, and others, significant reservations about the notion of understanding continued to linger in the philosophy of science (see, for example, Trout 2002). A notable shift occurred with Henk de Regt’s distinction between the “feeling” or phenomenology of understanding and genuine understanding (de Regt 2004, 2009: ch. 1; cf. de Regt and Dieks 2005). In particular, he argued that the feeling is neither necessary nor sufficient for genuine understanding. De Regt’s important distinction helped pave the way for a new surge of work on the topic over the last two decades, and helped philosophers move beyond thinking of understanding mainly in terms of felt “aha!” or “eureka!” experiences.