ABSTRACT: When IBM's Deep Blue beat Kasparov in 1997, I (1998) complained that chess is too easy, relative to what the human mind can muster. But then, in 2011, playing a game based in human language, IBM's Watson (1.0) beat the best human /Jeopardy!/ players on the planet. Now, thanks to a grant from IBM to RPI, a team at the latter is working with IBM to make Watson smarter; i.e., we're working toward Watson n.0, and beyond. What does Watson's prowess, and the engineering now underway to make him smarter, tell us about the philosophy, theory, and future of AI? We present and defend an answer to this question, one that among other things implies that a key, foundational hierarchy among computational formal logics (some of which constitute a mathematization of Watson 1.0's UIMA-based mind) provide a framework for predicting the future of the interaction between /homo sapiens sapiens/ and increasingly intelligent computing machines. And it turns out that this future was probably anticipated and called for in no small part by Leibniz, who thought that God, in giving us formal logic for capturing mathematics, sent thereby a hint to humans that they should search for a formal logic able to capture cognition across the full span of human intelligence.
