Is it valid to use "literally" to mean "actually" when composing a hyperbole? [closed]

This is my take:

In language, there is hyperbole and there is error. They are not the same.

It is so amazing it will make your head explode. - hyperbole
It is so amazing it will literally make your head explode. - error

The first is clearly hyperbole. Nothing is so amazing that it will make your head explode. The second is error. It is a contradiction in terms. It is self-defeating as an intensifier. Consider:

It is so amazing it will, in an actual or true sense, as opposed to an imaginary or figurative sense, make your head explode.
It is so amazing it will not make your head explode.

Does that sound strange, or confusing, or convincing?

Intensifiers are fine, even in hyperbole.

It is so amazing it will freaking totally make your head explode. - intensified hyperbole

Literally just isn't a great intensifier. Even though its use in this way has made it into a couple of dictionaries (with a caveat).