Chinese room has been discussed to death of course.

Here's one fun approach (out of 100s) :

What if we answer the Chinese room with the Systems Reply [1]?

Searle countered the systems reply by saying he would internalize the Chinese room.

But at that point it's pretty much exactly the Cartesian theater[2] : with room, homunculus, implement.

But the Cartesian theater is disproven, because we've cut open brains and there's no room in there to fit a popcorn concession.

[1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/chinese-room/

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartesian_theater

It just seemed like relevant background that the author might not have been aware of, adjacent and substantial enough to warrant a mention.

I think there is some validity to the Cartesian theater, in that the whole of the experience that we perceive with our senses is at best an interpretation of a projection or subset of "reality."

Oh right, and, if you're interested, there were quite a number of interesting discussion on the chinese room on HN back when John Searle died!

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45563627