Psychology had to be a science studying behaviour and mind of living beings.
There is a separate part of it studying specifically human behaviour and mind.
However, there is absolutely no any definition of how exactly human behaviour and mind different from non-human ones and how to separate one from another.
So, psychology can't even give an answer to the very basic question that obviously should precede any further study - is some person mind and behaviour human or non-human?
Psychology could have been very useful instrument to detect those with non-human behaviour and mind among us with scientific precision, but it was purposedly turned into pseudoscience bullshit to not even allow that question.
How many times was Alexandria burned down / destroyed?
Why was the wayback machine hacked and then DDOSed...
Do we? If we forgot how would we know? (Atlantis, Akashic Records, Rosetta Stone, Emerald Tablets)
100% agree.
Esoteric vs Exoteric
Let's look at Mathematics as an example of this.
Basic Arithmetic ( 1 + 1 = 2) is Exoteric
Calculus and advanced Geometry = Esoteric
I digress...
Psychology was neutered heavily, and doesn't analyze the deeper more spiritual aspects of our humanity.
How can one know what the software of the computer looks like by looking at only the BIOS, or worse observing the computer hardware only. The computer hardware can't show one what software is currently running and how it looks as an interface on a screen, monitor or terminal.
IMO Pyschology has become what is the Windows operating system of that practice, without acknowledging Linux, Router OS, MacOS (BSD) or Cisco OS. Studying the WIndows operating system is fine, but Windows doesn't run the internet or smart phones. Therefore its a very narrowed field, that doesn't look at the whole picture of the psych. (sorry for shitty analogy)
Exactly, that's why a materialist approach to psychology doesn't work. You can't appeal to nature (hardware) to show you what the software (mind, soul) is. This is most evident in the field of ethics - looking at nature can't tell you what's right or wrong - it just is. Only a evaluation by a mind that has conception of morality can do that and concepts are not found in the material world or subject to empirical observation.
The bias of the observer is also important. How I perceive something will be differently than how you perceive something.