See it is like an addition, but not necessarily considered a critical one. It is a shame though for qualitative research provides such in depth reports and insights that you could be amazed.
What is your background if you do not mind me asking? What do you do? You are still anonymous and if you prefer you could PM me with this information. I am asking because I am thinking that we may not be far with our backgrounds after the exchange.
Psychology also has such theorists. Namely Freudian "unconscious" where one is completely unaware of their behavior or thoughts has not been found yet. Other more conscious levels such as the preconscious as well as its more cognitive form of "non-conscious" have been identified.
But not the one where one is completely oblivious about as it is the case with the psychoanalytic main concept - the unconscious or Id. Yet it stood as a political dogma for a long while and had various followers since.
Or how about the ones that do not use probability at all. Should History classes be abandoned? Not all findings are accurate you know. Some data is deduced or otherwise assumed for they did not lived to our time (especially for ancient history).
How about Anthropology? Some data are found and then a lot is mainly interpreted on top of such data to provide links about ancient civilization.
These are not exact sciences neither. Should they be abandoned for it? How narrow would science be if left with only the exact ones: Chemistry, Math, Physics, and Biology?