“Your previous statement implied that darkness, being defined by the absence of light, is therefore less real than light. If the abscence of light is real, then darkness, which is a description of that condition is real as well, eh?”
No. Doesn’t follow at all.
Try this: try starting with the presumption that the absence of a thing is not a thing, and figure out why that is true. Then you can go back to the position that the absense of a thing is a thing, and possibly with the new insight figure out why that proposition is false.
Well, we’ll have to agree to disagree. Darkness is quite a real phenomena, regardless of whether you define it by the absence of something else.