Is neuroscience and psychology connected in some way?

They are currently fighting. Neuroscience says that psychology has just made up words, conditions, and treatments without connecting them to reality, (neurological understanding). Psychology says that neuroscience is such a primitive science that it's clinically useless. They both have good points. My opinion comes from philosophy, specifically philosophy of mind. Essentially, this view states that psychology and neurology are two different languages talking about the same thing. That is, they can both be talking about the same phenomena, use totally different words to do so, and both be right. You might think that this is a battle that neurology will eventually win, as it gets more advanced, but try this example.Physics has been trying to swallow chemistry in the same way for a long time. Eventually, (maybe now, I don't keep up), you could actually describe a complex chemical reaction purely in terms of subatomic particles and forces. But if you're trying to understand how molecules fit together, why would you? It'd be needlessly complicated. Chemistry and physics have both built up robust, useful disciplines and languages talking about largely the same phenomena. I hope that neuroscience and psychology will someday call a similar truce.