You are making two different claims, and then treating them as one. 1. Mimicking a process may not prove that the system is truly preforming the same process.

You are making two different claims, and then treating them as one. 1. Mimicking a process may not prove that the system is truly preforming the same process. In this case, a "reasoning" process. 2. A system that simulates a process cannot, by definition, be doing the process. The first claim can be defended, but the second doesn't follow from the first. Calling it a "simulation" is assuming the conclusion. What makes it a simulation rather than some implementation of reasoning on a different substrate? I.e. transistors rather than neurons.