I'm saying why call the unknown "magic" if there is already a word for it? Generally when someone asks "Do you believe in magic?" It generally means anything happening for no logical reason or without explanation,where as the explanation is magic, therefore I generally say no. That's the way I see it at least if something already has a word for it, no need to define by anything else. By that definition of magic I'm total believer in magic but I don't see the point in calling it as such. Luck is different because I don't know of any words that describes the thing luck describes and calling someone lucky or unlucky is much easier than saying "everything happening outside of your control is just so happening to benefit you or the opposite". I feel as though when others try to reasign words that describe supernatural concepts to natural concepts its a vain effort to try and hold onto the concept as natural than supernatural. Someone wanting to stilm believe in magic will call the unknown magic to hold onto their wishful thinking of magic, then others listen to them describe magic as the unknown and just goes along with it. I did that with the concept of a soul, I would say "well couldn't a soul simply be our consciousness, our ability to be self aware, as well as aware of everything else not beyond our knowledge?" Of course acknowledging in the end there is no reason to think we are immortal after death. Then I realized what reason do I have to call that a soul? It's already called consciousness. For me its the same with pantheism, "the universe is god, god is the universe" why call the universe anything else but the universe? Like I said this is just the way I see it.