I definitely don't object to calling out particular subfields when they're non-empirical and heavily influenced by ideology, which I know happens. What I object

I definitely don't object to calling out particular subfields when they're non-empirical and heavily influenced by ideology, which I know happens. What I object to are sweeping generalizations that the whole thing is "not science" and "entirely populated by ideological activists". That's intellectually lazy and unfair to the many people who do good work trying to unravel the workings of attention, memory, perception, and reasoning. We should try to talk with a higher level of detail and distinguish rigorous work from low-quality work rather than throw out the baby with the bathwater.