There are facts, like the natural laws and the speed of light, and beliefs, like all kinds of Gods. The difference between facts and beliefs is fundamentally that facts can be empirically tested, ie, can be verified by practical tests, which beliefs can’t. This difference resides in that facts are statements about how matters FUNCTION, whereas beliefs are statements about how matters ARE. We can test how matters FUNCTION, but we can’t test how matters ARE.
This limitation (ie, difference) is logically understandable by that it is, of course, impossible to understand HOW something ARE, because if something could BE what it IS, then the difference between BEING and BECOMING (ie, between facts and beliefs) would eradicate itself, ie, would not BE. The fact that this difference IS does thus mean that nothing IS what it seems to BE.
Another contribution to understanding of conceptualization http://menvall.wordpress.com/