Reading Wickedness by Midgely, which is moral philosophy, I was interested at its treatment of Freud and engaging with psychology, so, is pscyhology a kind of philosophy would you say? Is it all theory anyway, concepts which work one way or another providing the same direction or supporting the same illusions?
Philosophy is the discipline that is concerned with ethics, metaphysics (non-empirical reality) and epistemology (knowledge theory and the method we use in acquiring knowledge about the world). Notably, all three of these activities require one to reason abstractly and to figure out concepts more than to understand entities that could be readily found in the empirical world.
Psychology is a science and by virtue of that relies very heavily on the empirical method or a careful examination of the physical world. By today's standards, Freud wasn't doing psychology as his study does meet the rigorous empirical standards endorsed by contemporary psychologists. Was he doing philosophy? Yes, though unsuccessfully as his views are poorly supported by arguments of abstract reasoning.
As a general note on the history of intellectual development of the human civilization, not only questions of psychology, but also those of physics, chemistry, biology and all other sciences were approached philosophically or mostly by abstract reasoning. Only recently scholars have developed a method of rigorous empirical investigation which is called scientific today. Beforehand, there was no significant difference between science and philosophy. Today, the difference is not vast, but notable nonetheless. Philosophy still plays a huge role in the sciences as every empirical experiment needs a hypothesis and a great deal of other information that needs to be discovered by abstract reasoning; however, today it is not acceptable to establish a scientific conclusion without the support of the empirical method of research. In the past doing so was permissible and for this reason Freud's work was at once legitimately regarded as psychological, yet today it no longer can be.
By the same token, I insist that Jung's typological work also belongs to the discipline of philosophy rather than psychology. However, Jung, unlike Freud wrote quality philosophy because his arguments regarding typology have an internal logical consistency and are founded on the likely true premises regarding human nature. His work will not be scientifically vindicated until we manage to empirically test claims about the tendencies of the human mind. In order to do that, neuroscience will need to have advanced sufficiently to offer insight with regard to the connection of certain neurons fire under a specific set of circumstances and the cognitive experiences of the person in whose brain the neurons were taking action.
Anyhow, I think I gave you more information than you asked for. In simple terms, Psychology is distinct from philosophy because its method is empirical, the philosophical method isn't. Freud did write philosophy, but he didn't do a good job. (The difference between good philosophy and bad is that the former is well supported by abstract reasoning, yet the latter is more like groundless speculation.)