Maybe this is nit-picky, but the use of "Cognitive" in the name seems odd. This service relies on applied maths (e.g., machine learning), not "cognition." I guess it was a marketing decision?
UPDATE:
0: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1334394/pdf/jeab...
1: http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/handle/123456789/20501...
In any case, the word "cognitive" is used as in "cognitive science",
On the topic of "processing," it's very difficult (sometimes impossible) to know what humans or nonhumans are doing covertly when they "process" stimuli. Thus, I'm not sure how you can determine that "they [animals] categorize differently than us."
A dog that is trained to sit when his owner says, "sit" must be "processing human language" when the dog sits. Right? I know this is an oversimplified example, but I'm just making a point that calling things "cognitive" and referring to "processing" doesn't help explain what is really happening. Sometimes these terms obscure a description/explanation. Skinner [0] makes this point a lot better than me.
[0]: http://carboneclinic.com/portal/conferences/files/IESCUM%20D...
It's not too different from "cloud" was when it launched. Sure, it's not anything more than a new approach to the same things we used to do, but with the marketing and the different mindset, we begin to see a shift in the IT landscape. Sure "cloud" just means "someone else's computer" but IT infrastructure looked a lot different before "cloud" really took off. Cognitive is supposed to be computers doing things they used to do, but in a more human-like fashion, taking human needs and wants into consideration.
If there's one thing IBM is assuredly good at, it's inventing new buzzwords.