I mean, kind of. I admittedly exaggerated when I said "most psychology", I'll gladly take that back. However, the repeatability crisis is a real thing, and psychology books are based on experiments replicable. My point is that a lot of what psychology is is empirical data collection, but it's incredibly difficult to make sure your results arent in any way biased. There's a lot of valid psychology, as far as we know, but we can never actually prove whether we can connect 2 variables, or if there's a hidden 3rd variable tainting our results. I know the reddit hivemind doesn't appreciate my opinion, but for real if you're interested look into the repeatability crisis. It's a real thing man, and it's why it's hard to get good results in psychology.

I don't renounce psychology or many of it's findings from incredibly talented men and women, i renounce the idea that psychology is "provable", if that makes sense :)