Searle's Chinese Room thought experiment is about mastering the Chinese language. There are two issues I have with it as it was originally presented: 1. Master

Searle's Chinese Room thought experiment is about mastering the Chinese language. There are two issues I have with it as it was originally presented: 1. Mastering a language is not the same as having consciousness. 2. Who "knows Chinese" in the Chinese Room thought experiment? I would say neither Searle nor Searle in/as part of the Chinese Room "speak" Chinese. But it is fair to say that the book that the fictional Searle follows can be seen as a model of the Chinese language; or at least the combination of the book and Searle as its "processor" collectively are an implemented operational model of the Chinese language. And a model of Chinese is NOT the same as being skilled at conversing in Chinese (executing the model in a particular way). Other posters here have drawn analogies from music evoking certain subjective emotions, and again a semantic network that has concept nodes labelled with the names of these emotions is not the same as experiencing these emotions, although the semantic network can be said to constitute a model of sorts of the music's effects. But again, model(x) != qualia(x).