The goal of the Chinese Room Argument

Is not clear.  To me, the argument is to show that most humans cannot think logically and fall for this
false argument.  The argument's supposed goal is to convince the listener (not a matter of
mathematical proof, it is an argument) that:
Formal computations on symbols cannot produce thought.

Humans don't know what thought looks like.  If they look at a brain scan, they cannot describe how
the 100 billion neurons with up to 10 thousand connections each, can form a thought.  And yet, they
often pretend to be able to look at a supercomputer with all of its transistors, integrated circuits
and wires and determine that it can
NOT think.  They do this with a sense of "feeling".  They "feel"
that the inorganic system cannot think.

Consider the problem of scale.  A drop of water is not something which would cause a human to drown,
but billions of such drops would fill a pool and pose the hazard of drowning.  A single floating particle
of wood dust is not a hazard, but a barn full of such particles can explode.  The whole world of humans
if all awake at the same time and if all given a terminal connected to the Internet, could NOT
simulate the Google search engine.  The fact is that a single human being in a room cannot simulate a
brain which can answer questions in Chinese.  Such a single human could not even simulate the actions
of a single ant in an ant colony nor even the proper actions of a single nerve.

The argument depends on it being posed to a human and that the human be "loyal" to humans and have
a bias that if the room can answer questions in Chinese, then the secret to doing that must be in the
human.  The problem is that the room-computer is much too slow to do much of anything useful.

Next