alt Hacker NewsYou are referring to the systems reply:
> Searle’s response to the Systems Reply is simple: in principle, he could internalize the entire system, memorizing all the instructions and the database, and doing all the calculations in his head. He could then leave the room and wander outdoors, perhaps even conversing in Chinese. But he still would have no way to attach “any meaning to the formal symbols”. The man would now be the entire system, yet he still would not understand Chinese. For example, he would not know the meaning of the Chinese word for hamburger. He still cannot get semantics from syntax.
> The man would now be the entire system, yet he still would not understand Chinese.
Really, here the only issue is Searle's inability to grasp the concept that the process is what does the understanding, not the person (or machine, or neurons) that performs it.