Random Observation is Random
Y'know what strikes me as odd about Star Wars?
Well, okay, there are multiple answers to this question. But the one I have in mind is the use of "droids" to refer to robots. Presumably, this is a shortening of "android." But although androids are robots, many (perhaps most) robots are not androids. Androids refer to robots that are significantly humanoid. Data from Star Trek and R. Daneel Olivaw from Isaac Asimov's books are two good examples.
In fact, etymologically, an android is a robot that resembles a male human ("andro" is from the Greek word for "man" or "male"); a robot that resembles a female human would more accurately be called a gynoid. The fact that humanoid robots are called androids, rather than anthroids, is an example of considering male as default, rather than simply one segment of humanity (or roboticity, though of course the idea of robots having any gender at all is simply a convention). I think that anthrobot would have been a better name than androids, but it's probably too late to change it.
Regardless, the term android is reserved for robots that resemble human beings. You could consider C-3PO to roughly fit this definition. Although no one is likely to mistake him for an actual human, he does have two legs, two arms, a torso, and a head, with a face including two eyes, a mouth, and an outward dent for a nose. R2-D2, on the other hand, is definitely not humanoid. Yet both are clearly referred to as droids.
Yeah, it's not really hugely significant, just something that struck me as odd. Although this does mean that when Obi-Wan says, "These are not the droids you're looking for," he is technically speaking the truth (from a certain point of view). They're not droids, they're a droid and a robot.
(Of course, my main point here is null and void if the word droid doesn't come from android.)
Well, okay, there are multiple answers to this question. But the one I have in mind is the use of "droids" to refer to robots. Presumably, this is a shortening of "android." But although androids are robots, many (perhaps most) robots are not androids. Androids refer to robots that are significantly humanoid. Data from Star Trek and R. Daneel Olivaw from Isaac Asimov's books are two good examples.
In fact, etymologically, an android is a robot that resembles a male human ("andro" is from the Greek word for "man" or "male"); a robot that resembles a female human would more accurately be called a gynoid. The fact that humanoid robots are called androids, rather than anthroids, is an example of considering male as default, rather than simply one segment of humanity (or roboticity, though of course the idea of robots having any gender at all is simply a convention). I think that anthrobot would have been a better name than androids, but it's probably too late to change it.
Regardless, the term android is reserved for robots that resemble human beings. You could consider C-3PO to roughly fit this definition. Although no one is likely to mistake him for an actual human, he does have two legs, two arms, a torso, and a head, with a face including two eyes, a mouth, and an outward dent for a nose. R2-D2, on the other hand, is definitely not humanoid. Yet both are clearly referred to as droids.
Yeah, it's not really hugely significant, just something that struck me as odd. Although this does mean that when Obi-Wan says, "These are not the droids you're looking for," he is technically speaking the truth (from a certain point of view). They're not droids, they're a droid and a robot.
(Of course, my main point here is null and void if the word droid doesn't come from android.)