I think the critique is fundamentally different from saying "it's soft science". It's saying "it's bad research, misquoting experts and references, drawing slo

I think the critique is fundamentally different from saying "it's soft science". It's saying "it's bad research, misquoting experts and references, drawing sloppy conclusions aimed at a lay audience". You can do psychology and psychiatry better than that, even if acknowledging they are not hard science. There's no excuse for being sloppy or outright fraudulent.