Newton famously devoted a large amount of attention to alchemy.
It doesn’t necessarily follow that because there has been research done, and academic careers had, that knowledge has, by necessity, been acquired.
I’m not suggesting that information hasn’t been gathered. I didn’t argue that complexity can’t be studied — that’s a straw man. I made a distinction between chaos and complexity. What I’m saying is that human behaviour, on an individual level and on a macro level, belongs within the category of chaos.
Within the chaos, as is in its nature, patterns may form, and they may seemingly be permanent enough to describe as being laws, but in reality they’re not immutable.
There are patterns within the things you describe, but you’re never going to discover absolute, binding laws. Only ever tendencies which are subject to exception. That’s why social sciences should be classified as humanities. They seek to illuminate not fundamental laws of nature, but patterns and tendencies in human behaviour.