Why materialists are predominantly materialists

[Neo-Scholastic]

...a reductionist isn't necessarily proposing a specific explanation of how sign systems work by suggesting that they have their basis in the physical.

Doing so is a serious omission at best and baseless assertion at worst.

I didn't mean that the reductionist is arguing that signs do not reduce to the physical.  Only that you don't have to possess a full fledged theory of the subject to be a reductionist.

Or rather they don't have any principle by which they can reincorporate phenomena that already dismissed as illusions. Then they confidently re-issue the promissory note that someday-maybe a theory will be forthcoming.