i dunno how seriously anyone is actually taking this discussion but i find these comments interesting and it's nice that the game stimulates this kind of debate.
personally i believe that the framing of dark and fire/light in this game is meant to encourage you to disassociate morality with light or immorality with dark. it is a significant statement that "humanity" is the fragmented "dark" soul. humanity, as a resource, also empowers chaos, and luck/discovery. humanity embodies, to me, a kind of emotional volatility, but also willfulness. it's a gift and a curse. i don't believe either supporting or resisting the gods is framed as particularly more ethical. one is a move to protect the status quo (even though it is blatantly deteriorating, and the undead and their status in society are an obvious, major problem despite the apparent "order" of the world. also, the world of the game is riddled with illusions that make order seem more secure than it actually is, which insinuates the disavowal of creeping weakness among those who see themselves as in power), while the other is a move to bring in a new age (despite not knowing exactly what it could mean, or if it will be better). this is basically the gambit of choosing any political or ethical stance and carrying it out in daily life. given how messed up the world of the game is, i tend toward the side of a revolution over keeping the status quo. it seems like change is inevitable, either way. and the dark in turn will give way to embers.