Is religion a necessary complement?

From this interview:

Quote:

Sheahen: What about intelligent people who accept evolution and do marvel at scientific advances (and perhaps were raised without much religion), but who suddenly find themselves wanting more—wanting a specifically religious dimension to their lives that science can't fill? Dawkins: Well, I've never met one. I've met plenty of people who call themselves religious, but when you actually probe, when you ask them in detail what they believe, it turns out to be this very same awe and wonder that Wilson and Einstein talked about. If they're genuinely intelligent, it does not involve the supernatural. Unless they were brought up that way—but you were careful to say people who were not brought up religious. My suggestion is that you won't find any intelligent person who feels the need for the supernatural. What you will find is the need for a sense of transcendent wonder, which I share as well.

Do you think that religion (or the supernatural in general) is a necessary complement to a scientific worldview?



I'm a bit at a loss as to where this idea even comes from. Is believing in the Easter Bunny a necessary complement for people who have rabbits as pets?

via JREF Forum http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=263782&goto=newpost