Ideas are in:
The basic idea is that AI has spent the last 60 years trying to make a computer think. The machine was created to perform computations (artillery tables, calculations for the hydrogen bomb, etc., ). It had fast processing and a large quantity of directly addressable unique memory locations, and this meant it could be programmed by humans to execute conditionals and behave like an intelligent human.
The concept of computation, thus, has to be the explanation of the mind. If the machine is going to be a mind, the mind has to fundamentally be computational. So AI fixated on computation, both as an explanation of the mind and as an explanation of the machine.
It assumes that the computational explanation of the machine is fact and hence not theory and hence not open to debate. It got the computational understanding from Computer Science. How else could it be? It must be fact.
So AI has spent 60 years pursuing the completely false notion that both the mind and the machine intrinsically perform computations. Happily, though, the machine can perform non-computational operations that enable the building of internal semantic structures.
Searle’s Chinese Room Argument is used to clarify AI’s ideas about the alleged computational mind. He rightly rejects the idea of the computational mind. His mistake was to buy into and accept AI’s false idea of the computational machine. So while his conclusion that no computation could ever think is correct. His conclusion that the computer (so called) could ever think is false.