From the Merriam-Webster dictionary:
Part of my philosophy about people, I let them define themselves. Whether they fit that definition or not is determined by their actions. Problem with "reasons", there is really no way to materialistically determine the truthfulness of them.
I probably should add, that I consider myself to be a materialist. Yes there is some hogpog aspects to it. I see it as a develop based on new knowledge and understanding as time progress. Basic scientific principles are based on materialism. I don't mind not knowing and don't feel a need to fill in the blanks with some kind of theory or conjecture.
There are holes in materialism. Some thing we can not quantify or qualify. Soft sciences deal with those issues often. Look at psychology, diagnosis are based on perceptions and they are subjective to the individual. They can not be weight, measure or physically determined to 100%. The DMS V is based on conventions by the board of psychiatric medicine or similar group.
Also emotions are also difficult to determine and are again determined by subjective means. Look at love, very often talked about, some what definable, yet it is subjective as whether it exists or not. I accept the concept of love, but I can not physically demonstrate it. It's existence is based on circumstantial evidence. That is a very subjective measurement. A reasonable conclusion and also be very wrong. How often have we heard the term, "I thought he/she loved me"?
So to me, the measurement that we can actually use, is the actions of the person. While the reasoning may be more important, there is no way we can say conclusively that the stated actions are true.