MOREOVER Searle asserts that there is no essential difference.I between the role the computer plays in the first case. and the role he plays in the latter. Each is simply following a program, step-by-step, which simulates/, intelligent behavior. And yet, Searle points out, " I don't speak a word of Chinese. 9 Since he does not understand Chinese, Searle argues, we must infer that the computer does not understand Chinese either. Searle argues that without "understanding"(what philosophers call"intentionality"), we cannot describe what the machine is doing as thinking". Since it does not think, it does not have a mind" in anything like the normal sense of the word according to searle. Therefore he concludes, " strong Al"is mistakenMOREOVER Searle asserts that there is no essential difference between the role the computer plays in the first case and the role he plays in the latter. Each is simply following a program, step-by-step, which simulates intelligent behavior. And yet, Searle points out, "I don't speak a word of Chinese." [9] Since he does not understand Chinese, Searle argues, we must infer that the computer does not understand Chinese either. Searle argues that without "understanding" (what philosophers call "intentionality"), we cannot describe what the machine is doing as "thinking". Since it does not think, it does not have a "mind" in anything like the normal sense of the word, according to Searle.Therefore, he concludes,"strongAI" is mistaken