Is there, or should there be, a distinction between these two concepts?

Interesting question. You and I might see that 2nd question as factual but unknown, but believers are by definition determined to accept the existence of their god as fact. No proof required!.

Favorite color or movie or songwriter are preferences – choices among known options based on subjective perceptions.

Philosophical and religious opinions are beliefs, which are also based on subjective perceptions, but with abstract concepts. You say the answer to whether the Abrahamic God exists is obtainable – but I find that answering any related questions on these topics usually only lead to more questions, so I dispute that these are things that can be proven.

I think a better example of your second concept are scientific theories which have much evidence for or against them, but which others refute – such as whether humans have caused climate change and whether vaccines cause autism. People with opinions contrary to the scientific evidence still act as though these are philosophical or religious beliefs, and thus they defend them with a lot of emotion.

I think the answer to this question is dependent on the context of the question requiring an answer. So who is asking the question, why do they need the answer and is a scientific answer even possible?

If you ask me what colour should you paint the outside of your house, this question is likely to generate opinion based responses and that’s perfectly fine. If you said your house is very hot and you want to paint the outside to reduce the internal temperature so what colour should you paint your house, that would require a factual response.

However, there are some topics where there is no definitive, factual answer. For instance, does God exist? What scientific evidence exists to answer this question? Answers can only be driven by belief or non-belief.

Distinction between the two concepts, ”what is the best color” can be factual. If I want to paint a shed to blend in with the foliage in the backyard or not be visible from the street, there are definite colors that can do the trick. If I just want to paint something but I don’t want it to fade out quickly, there are colors or paint to use for that.

The question of ”Is there a God”, to some there is no factual answer, because there nothing to smell, touch, hear, see, measure, weigh, take a temperature of, etc. To me a better example would be if there are extraterrestrials out there. Enough people have claimed to see them to warrant the thought. What did they see? They saw something, just what, is the unknown. One doesn’t need to believe in extraterrestrials for others to have seen what they saw. As to if black holes exist, I say they are in the same avenue of if God exist, science say because of clues or evidence they seen that they should exist because they see what they expected to see to prove their existence. As a believer, I have seen things I have expected based off what the Word told me. If it happened once, I could dismiss it as circumstance, but when it happens repeatedly and in timely manner to have a positive effect, I see it as evidence of what I expected to see.

The former is more on the opinion of individuals where there are no hard facts, but opinion to what is best or better, where the latter is more of a mystery where there are fact, but getting to them is unknown.

Postmodern relativism was ripe with the second type of opinion. You can’t have an opinion about whether or not a fact is true or not.

@hearkat, you raise a good point that an even further distinction could be made about things that have factual answers that may be unattainable (I agree the existence of the Christian god might be in this category – you will find upon a reread of my post that I never claimed this is knowable), vs. things that have factual answers and those answers are within science’s reach or, worse, have already been reached by science and people simply refuse to acknowledge that.

Even so, even if it is unknowable, the Christian God’s existence does in reality have a yes or no answer, does it not? Even if no mere mortal will ever truly know the answer. Is it still a matter of “opinion” then? I agree the line is easier to draw with more attainable questions such as whether vaccines cause autism.

@osoraro I tend to agree.

Although the first case differs among individuals, for a given person it is factual and can be demonstrated. I can offer you various sets of objects that only differ by color and track which color you choose most often. This may not be the same as what you believe is your favorite color.

For the second case, we could distinguish between those things that are potentially verifiable through scientific means and those that lie beyond science. The existence of extra-terrestrials falls in the first category and the existence of God is in the second.

No.

Supernatural means outside the realm of nature (beyond the visible observable universe) which also means it is beyond the realm of what can be studied by science. Therefore, there would be no opinions with factual answers for questions like “does the Christian god exist?”

A list of the definitions I apply:

Knowledge: something considered true based on sufficient evidence to constitute proof on a given level of knowledge. I won’t go into the levels of knowledge or quantity versus quality of evidence.

Belief: something considered true based on insufficient evidence to constitute proof on any given level of knowledge (but keep in mind it is based on evidence). Example: Many believe that a god exists based upon authoritarian evidence (e.g. the bible, their priest, their parents, etc.)

Faith: the consideration of something true regardless of evidence (usually because the person desires to). Example: Some few choose to have faith in a god regardless of its validity.

Judgment: a subjective evaluation of objective material. Example: A court verdict rendering.

Opinion: a subjective evaluation of subjective material. Example: These cookies are better than those cookies.

There are distinctions, but no one knows them. Similar to politics: everyone has an opinion but the average voter is uneducated and not informed.

Its never going to happen, but I would have loved a critical thinking and debate class mandatory early on in school.

Yes, there should be a distinction. But for the second class, people are not entitled to their opinion. They are entitled to their INFORMED opinion. An ignorant guess is not as valid as a well thought out point of view.