Chi and chakras are very well understood to not be science, so "pseudoscience" is a very accurate description.
"Science" is "The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena."
Things investigated by science are not in themselves science. That doesn't make them pseudoscience.
Its funny how people use terms to confirm their own particular bias. Cognitive dissonance at its finest.
Protoscience or a mix of abductive and inductive reasoning should not be entirely dismissed because it is not yet deductible. Often the process of "knowing" and developing axiomatic systems comes from first unknowing and grasping, and that doesn't even get into the incompleteness of axiomatic systems. We are refiners, we refine; your diamonds come from the dirt and are the next diamond's dirt.