If you don't accept that there is something we haven't yet explained because we haven't found the right paradigm to explain it yet you're stopping the evolution of science at the current level.

At the moment science has a materialistic view, but for all we know in a 100 years they'll discover things that we're unable to imagine now as we are thinking within science's current principles.

So magic is just undocumented science :P

>At the moment science has a materialistic view,

And for all we know in 100 years we'll be able to causally interact with something nonphysical? Scientific epistemology is based on where and when we can have causal contact, not on assuming that things are "material".

No, it indicates neither.

It actually indicates an area that is not explained currently by science and that some people theorise about in a "non-scientific" or anecdotal way. This has been illustrated many times by herbs used by traditional healers (using anecdotal reasoning) which were ignored by science until the technology existed to test the herbs for medicinal purposes.

Traditional forms of human knowledge ("magic") may not be "scientific" but it does not indicate a lack of understanding. The movement of epistemology from magic to science is a spectrum not a series of hard stops. The world is grey, not black and white.