This is nothing new, but it is a pretty clear popular presentation of a trend in science that has been growing for the past hundred years at least, actually more, if one counts William James, for instance.
What it says is that the current way of doing science makes huge ontological assumptions that cannot be true based on what is now known scientifically and has been known for some time.
This is hardly new knowledge historically, since it is found in the oldest extant human records, the Vedas, and anthropological studies suggest that this POV is much more primitive than the dawn of recorded history. This is also suggested by the early records, where the view is already well developed in terms of its articulation.
This view in no way contradicts solid scientific knowledge, only certain philosophical assumptions that underlie the POV. Adopting a consciousness-based framework leaves all existing knowledge largely as it is but opens the door to a new way of looking that enables a broader and deeper perspective and allows for the integration of the spectrum of human knowledge and creativity — science, art, humanities, idealistic philosophy, and spirituality-based religion.
What would the effect on economics be? One effect would be less emphasis on "objectivity," that is, quantity, and more on subjectivity, that is quality, value, and creativity. Practically speaking, it would mean less emphasis on on the mainstream "orthodoxy," and greater openness to fresh ideas (which may not be new but merely excluded) and new thinking.
The Huffington Post
A Consciousness-Based Science
Deepak Chopra, M.D., FACP, Menas Kafatos, Ph.D., Fletcher Jones Endowed Professor in Computational Physics, Chapman University, and Rudolph E. Tanzi, Ph.D., Joseph P. and Rose F. Kennedy Professor of Neurology at Harvard University, and Director of the Genetics and Aging Research Unit at Massachusetts General Hospital
