All science is materialistic

[Jehanne]

In my opinion, Physicalism is a statement that there are four fundamental forces (noting the unification of the electroweak), and nothing more at present, except, perhaps, a fifth fundamental force that could account for Dark Energy.  If any additional forces beyond the Four or Five exist, they will someday be observed and modeled, and if they are never observed, it is almost surely due to the fact that they do not exist.

So physicalism is simply the scientific consensus at the time and not an overarching viewpoint?

How would we tell if there is another force? If we create a model with such a force and it is tested and verified by observation, does it then become physical? If supersymmetry is a thing, that would imply many other 'forces' in the form of bosons corresponding to known fermions. I would hate to say such speculation is un-scientific merely because it postulates more forces.

I'd also point out that this has a similar problem to materialism. Where materialism was focused on the fermions (matter), this seems to be too focused on the bosons (forces).

Once again, the relevant criterion seems to be testability.

Something like Dark Energy (or even Dark Matter) may not be testable (in the sense that the force can be manipulated in the LHC or its successors) but only observable, say, in its effects. It may be, say, in the realm of the Multiverse (if such exists) that additional forces beyond the Four or Five exist, and even though they will never be observed, perhaps, they could be described, say, by some String Theory model. But, alas, it may be impossible to distinguish one theoretical model from a competing one, as both may be mathematically coherent, yet where one is right but the other wrong. We will just never know.

A phenomenon that is non-physical is magical; such phenomenon, if they exist, can certainly be observed (e.g., the spontaneous healing of an adult amputee) but they cannot be modeled.