By David Russell
The new buzz that has been gaining much attention on the internet lately is Hyperianism. I first noticed it about a month ago and saw the attention it was getting, I decided to investigate. Founded or represented, because it doesn’t really tell you, by a guy named Morgue. Morgue is a performer of wild tricks like swallowing swords or a huge metal ball without choking to death on it. He also runs hooks through his nose and out his mouth, in which I got to say, Ouch! Though a talented performer in his field, he then takes himself out of that field to make wildly outlandish videos.
Backed by a worldview called Hyperianism, Morgue takes to the Internet, blasting religion, telling us we are brainwashed, and promoting his new religion. He claims he is taking humanity to the next level, whatever that really is? But at the end of the day its just the same old self worshiping, postmodernist, new age jargon we’ve all heard before.
Welcome back to the Union blog! We are in the process of wrapping up our series on apologetic arguments for the existence of God. But before we do, I felt, I had to speak on this. I rarely write about these things but I felt that this was needed. Lewis told us to answer bad philosophy with good philosophy, so that is what I am going to do. We will examine Hyperianism and write a refutation to this entire worldview. So buckle up, your in for a ride!
Human or Hyperian, that is the question? Hyperianism claims to be “Not a belief system, a knowledge system”. To be a member, you must reject all mainstream western religions, embrace your shadow, and sign a pledge. For that you get access to the secret library, if your awake, and hidden videos. You get to learn about mental sex and all the other big questions of life. The first question Hyperianism tries to answer is, Why are you alive? It sets up a presupposition that all we do is live in a static pattern or that we live in some unsatisfying way and are born into a slave system. We have no Will of our own and that a certain cast of people put this in place to blind us from the truth of reality. Whatever that actually means? It then offers its answer, just like most other faith based worldviews, it offers you hope, by shattering the illusion of this presupposed reality. That it is the only one that has this understanding and with it, can help you maximize your power, understand your purpose, and transform the universe.
This is where my first contention lies. Hyperianism does the same thing all other belief systems do. By claiming that we live in this static pattern of routine or an unsatisfied hamster wheel, it derives a truth claim about reality. But how could Morgue possibly know this, has he interviewed every person? I know some people that have incredibly fulfilling lives and live in a state of perpetual joy. So my contention comes in the way of belief. The contradiction lies in the belief that there is something wrong with the world. That a slave system is better than a free system. That a mundane existence is not how we ought to live. Morgue has to believe these things to be actually true in order for his worldview to get off the ground and to believe it makes his system a system of belief. Now, this is also where we have some agreement. I disagree with Morgues approach and his conclusions, but I do agree that there is something wrong with the world. Which leads to my second contention.
Hyperianism claims to reject traditional morality but is opened to a evolving morality. Rejecting the notion of good and evil, right and wrong. Doing this though makes Hyperianism a relativistic system. Relativism in itself is self contradictory. It has no ground to stand on. If right and wrong do not exist, how can Morgue say that mainstream religion is part of the problem? What problem? Problems are inherent to something actually being wrong. If he is imposing ethical relativism then he runs into the problem of saying that slavery in America 200 years ago, because it was ethically accepted, was okay. Now, since morality evolves, it is not okay. If it is acceptable again in 200 years, will it be okay? Does truth contradict itself? There is another problem with ethical relativism pointed out by Matt Slick, he says,
“Within ethical relativism, right and wrong are not absolute and must be determined in society by a combination of observation, logic, social preferences and patterns, experience, emotions, and “rules” that seem to bring the most benefit. Of course, it goes without saying that a society involved in constant moral conflict would not be able to survive for very long. Morality is the glue that holds a society together. There must be a consensus of right and wrong for a society to function well. Ethical relativism undermines that glue.”
Rejecting some of the universal truths objective morality brings, plunges society in even more of a conundrum that retreats from the line of logic and into the abyss of irrational decay. Theism offers such a better view. We claim that there is an objective standard of good and that this standard leads to discovering values that require of us certain duties to enact toward one another. All this on the basis of being human. For many years this was what was called Natural Law. It is self-evident and many of these laws you’ll find in every society today. Even Hyperianism can’t stray from these values in which it promotes. Ones like equality and freedom. For all the religious bashing Hyperianism does, it also does well in stealing its values from the Judeo-Christian value system. This leads to my third contention, rejection of mainstream religion.
Hyperianism rejects mainstream religion and falls into the same trap as all other anti-religious pundits. Instead of judging a religion on its abuses, Hyperianism should do the logical thing and judge it on its merits. But the hyperian gets cought begging the question frequently when they assess Christian belief. For example, saying Christianity is oppressive toward women, because you read a verse you think you understood, couldn’t be further from the truth. Christianity gave woman stature and equality with men. Christianity has long held the notion of freedom, equality, mercy, courage, justice, love for one another, grace, and knowledge. It has inspired documents like the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. It inspired Wilberforce to fight and end the Dutch slave trade. Why? Because Christianity believes that we are all made in the image of God and, because of that, we have intrinsic value given to us by the One who is ultimate value itself. But again, none of this matters. Why? Because all reality is an illusion to the Hyperian. Unless its mathematical reality…..?
This brings me to my last real contention. Besides the logical fallacies we’ve already gone over, this is the worst. To claim that reality is an illusion, makes the Hyperian belief system illusory. The Hyperian claims you can’t trust your senses because they have evolved to survive and deceive you. But, if I cannot trust my senses how can anyone trust that Hyperianism is the truth. You need your senses to observe that what you claim is true. Its like needing the self to tell the self that there is no self. It’s incoherent jargon. Then it goes further. Claiming that Mathematics is alive, we are mathematical beings. I am no mathematical philosopher but I do know that whether your a realist or an anti-realist, both claim that mathematics is causally inert. Even more so, Mathematics can’t be the ontic referent. Hyperians don’t claim anything about the beginning of the universe, but everything I gather suggest they believe it is eternal. But the universe can’t be eternal. Logic dictates there can be no such thing as an infinite regress. All evidence and reason point to a COSMIC BEGINNING. Mathematics can only exist within the universe, and many say it’s a human invention or a useful fiction. But this idea has been debated for years, never proven. Morgue never mentions the limitations of Mathematics and its bearing on the physical world or its failures in predictions. He assumes everything he is preaching, which speak volumes about his faith in mathematics. I kind of take the anti-realist view on this, but defer to the ancient philosopher Philo’s position, he maintained, as William Lane Craig points out, “That God created the physical world on the mental model in His mind.” That’s the reason math can be done.
Mathematics, because I am more of an anti-realist (meaning mathematical objects don’t exist in the ether), is at the end of the day, information. Information always implies intelligence. If there is no universe, then there is no math. But because there is a universe there is a blueprint, an expression of the grand architect. Also, because it is causally inert, it cannot provide meaning, eternal destiny, or purpose. Theism has way more explanatory power when solving the big questions. Origin, purpose, morality, and destiny can all be answered coherently by the Christian faith. It answers the reason for the structure we find in nature. It answers what is wrong with the world. It gives us a better hope than any other worldview available. And at last, it has the evidence to back it all up without pointing to secret libraries or videos.
In conclusion, Hyperianism is another faith, taking on more of a cultist/occultist type of behavior and view. It is not a knowledge based system but, as I have demonstrated, a belief system that contradicts itself over and over again unto incoherence. Says much for a system that claims to be of logic and reason. At the end of the day, to answer the question, Hyperian or Human? I would stick with human all day long. Don’t drink the Kool-aid folks.