I agree that pointless quantifying and systematizing can take the magic out of an unknown thing, but I also don't think something has to be unknown to be magical. There is magic in the sense of discovery of course, but once the thing is discovered there is magic in the feeling of achieving a greater understanding or mastery of the subject, and further understanding or discoveries that it enables.
I don't think you were trying to say that wasn't the case I just felt like pointing out that I don't see the dichotomy as being just between leftbrain scientists wanting to quantify and nitpick the magic out of everything and rightbrain poets who observe the numinous without making an effort to understand it.
my friend
we must draw a line
not between magic and technique
but between these and the those who see one for the other
there are some who'd say
that sufficiently analyzed magic is the same as technology
but only non-fools can tell that magic in truth is resistant to analysis
that is because spellcraft is not engineering and magic is not science
magic runs on authority, science destroys it
magic is jurisprudence and wonder, science is security and want
magic is the road that ends at an invitation towards the same road, but different from ever before and from ever again
science is the road that once travelled becomes the railroad
consider: the realms of mechanus and the legends of fay
if thou art to know in truth what is said, thou art to know the difference
between those who learn from magic what never was and can never be again
and those who believe there's magic in flinging fireballs of stable measurings