Well, so many wrongs, so little time. But first and foremost, science is not a branch of philosophy. It is a way of exploring and explaining the world in a consistent manner. While philosophy does try to explain the world it has no set method or a way to explore it. As a side note who doesn’t try to explain the world? The key here is the way. It has to be repeatable and doesn’t depend on observer. Meaning what I see — you can check. There fore your statement about subjective being real falls flat on it’s face. While may be real to you, nobody else cares — it’s not observable by others, and affects them as much as any mind delusions of yours might, ergo nobody want to waste their time on it, since it will die with you.
I have to add though, social sciences are not real sciences, just like theology is not a real science. They use scientific methods (most of the times), but they lack this repeatability check, so they have to rely on model predictions. Which of course introduces errors and will never account for many variable socium have.
I like to describe science and theory like paint by numbers. Facts are your numbers. If you connect them in the right order — your theory will create a meaningful picture, connect them without order you get chaos. Draw a picture not touching all of them and you get false science. The beauty of the right picture is that you test it. Test the number or any dot on the lines of the picture. Which is not possible with chaotic one or fake one.