Searles Chinese Room argument is very typical of the circular reasoning that many analytical philosophers, unfortunately, run into.
Of course the person in the room doesn't understand Chinese just like the individual neurons in my brain doesn't either.
It's the entire house that's conscious.
One reason why the mind is so hard to grasp and why people like Searle ends up with something like The Chinese Room argument which is really, to be honest a very sloppy argument is because of our obsession with turning it into a thing which can be located.
A much more fruitful way to think about the mind is as a pattern recognizing feedback loop and then reason from there.
That also gives you a much better idea way to think about evolution and how not just the conscious but the self-aware conscious mind come to be.
Gregory Bateson has some really interesting thoughts on that IMO.
Of course the person in the room doesn't understand Chinese just like the individual neurons in my brain doesn't either.
It's the entire house that's conscious.
One reason why the mind is so hard to grasp and why people like Searle ends up with something like The Chinese Room argument which is really, to be honest a very sloppy argument is because of our obsession with turning it into a thing which can be located.
A much more fruitful way to think about the mind is as a pattern recognizing feedback loop and then reason from there.
That also gives you a much better idea way to think about evolution and how not just the conscious but the self-aware conscious mind come to be.
Gregory Bateson has some really interesting thoughts on that IMO.