Over the years, our knowledge of AI has grown tremendously atleast in the geometrical sense with increased data if not ideas. This is because while all researchers are curious to explore the field and take it further, there are two schools of thought prevailing that have slowed down the progress. On one side, people think that machines are capable of replicating human cognition and carry out advanced intelligence processes sometimes even better than humans. Thus, they believe machines should be involved in day to day human decision making. Meanwhile, the others believe that AI is an essentially corrupt intelligence concept and people who put their trust in thinking machines are materialistic idol worshippers. They are of the thought that human thinking can be partly synthesized but never duplicated completely. However, John Searle, a philosopher at Berkeley was determined to figure out this conundrum by dividing AI into "Strong" and "Weak". According to him, tools or computers come under "Strong" artificial intelligence whereas programmes or robots are "Weak" artificial intelligence. His experiment, the "Chinese Room Argument" is one of the best and strongly validated counters to claims of AI that say that computers can or will be able to think someday. This argument is based on two key claims as Searle puts them- that "Brains cause minds" and that "syntax doesn 't suffice for semantics". In favour of "Strong" AI, Searle says, "the computer is not merely a tool in the