Freud is the father of psychoanalysis.
Pavlov1 is the father of psychology.
Psychology is often perceived as having an "unsound" scientific basis, which is most definitely not the case. Unfortunately, many people assume that because psychology is said to be the study of the "mind" it cannot possibly be objective or universal. While this is true in some cases, it applies only to a few aspects of psychology. Naturally, social psychology will suffer from cross-cultural differences, but that does not preclude it from using scientific methods to gather valid and useful data. Similarly, personality theory often suffers from circular reasoning; but just because one aspect of psychology cannot easily be studied in a scientific manner does not mean the whole science should be written off. A great deal of older theoretical physics was later shown to be wildly inaccurate; the Phlogiston theory, for example. However, such misled theories are not sufficient grounds for debunking the whole discipline.
Arguing that psychology makes too many assumptions to be seen as valid science is also a dead end; the behaviorist school of thought led by B.F.Skinner that was popular in the middle of the twentieth century prided itself on its sound scientific approach, and on explaining every action and reaction only in terms of observable phenomena. In, this way, the science as a whole was completely disconnected from any concept of mind whatsoever. This movement has since faded from popularity, and is perhaps best thought of as a backlash against the unscientific methods of psychoanalysis. Behaviorism has served to provide us with a generation of psychologists with rigorous scientific training, who are now teaching the psychologists of tomorrow. Current psychological theories, notably cognitive psychology, base a great deal - some may argue too many - of their ideas on computer science and epistemology, with an emphasis on processing, input, buffer sizes, and the forms of internal representations stored by the human brain. Good experimental research can be carried out to ascertain the nature of internal visual representations of the world. In one experiment, subjects are asked to identify if a rotated version of an image is in a mirror image or normal form; the amount of time to do this accurately increases linearly with increased angle of rotation, providing compelling evidence that internal visual knowledge must be manipulated in some way that relates to the way we manipulate solid, 3-d objects.
I have examined psychology. I also have a love of formal logic, and half a degree in Artificial Intelligence. There is a lot of rubbish floating about that tries to pass itself off as psychology, but it is a young science, and it is now intolerant of unscientific methods, and employs rigorous (and extremely dull) statistical tests to ensure that any data presented for publication is indeed valid and relates to a real rather than perceived phenomenon. This has ensured that psychologists have become scientific in their methods, and avoid conclusions that aren't backed by solid fact.
1. Wilhelm Wundt is actually often thought of as the father of psychology, I am told, as he opened the first psychology lab in 1879, many years before Pavlov came along.