here's the link, it's easily google-able though
these are the quotes that I think are most applicable to this blog's debate:
Wired: Do you still see that as the central issue, man of faith versus man of science?
Lindelof: The paradigm has shifted from that to, were we brought here for a very specific reason, and what is that reason? Locke is now the voice of a very large subset of the audience who believes that when Lost is all said and done, we will have wasted six years of our lives, that we were making it up as we went along, and that there’s really no purpose. And Jack is now saying, “the only thing I have left to cling to is that there’s got to be something really cool that’s going to happen, because I have really, really fucking suffered.”
Carroll: It’s like purposefulness versus randomness.
Lindelof:. That’s right. It’s order versus chaos, which is what it always was. But first it had to start as science versus faith, because Jack is a doctor and Locke is a guy who got up from his wheelchair and walked. Now the question has been boiled down to its essential root—is there a God or is there nothingness?
Carroll: Presumably, if it is order versus chaos or purpose versus randomness, there is no right answer. It’s not as if in the finale you’re going to say, “Yup, it was order.”
Cuse: I don’t think there’s a right answer.
Lindelof: But the show can’t have its cake and eat it, too. At the end of the day, if Locke and Jack were to sit down and say, “Well, we were kind of both right,” that would not be satisfying. It has to come down one way or another.
Cuse: But there’s still going to be plenty of room for debate when the show is over. We are going to take a stab at providing a conclusion, and one that we hope will be satisfying on a character level. The bigger questions, we recognize, are not answerable. We feel that demystifying some of the things we do on Lost is like the magician showing you how the trick is done, and we don’t want to do that.