All those "nature is digital" and/or "nature is analog" are tongue in cheek. We do rely on certain quantum effects for our nature to be the way it is, but the nature we know is far too macro for quantum effects to be dominant, at least for the most part. We not only live in a macro world, we live in a statistical world. Statistical effects are the dominant ones in our day-to-day life. Even with people: A person can be very unpredictable where as a group of people will follows very predictable behavioral paths.
What make analog more interesting is that you can see what is going on. From the days of vacuum tubes to today's ICs, you can trace this input to that vacuum tube to do whatever, then to the next component-configuration to do whatever, follow the line all the way to to output.
Digital is more abstract. Worst is of course MCU and the likes where you can have the same component doing entirely different things depending on the software that you can't see. They are "black boxes" that do their magic and you don't exactly know how it was done, or what else might have been done. So there are plenty of unsolved mysteries looking at MCU based circuits and some you can never solve unless you are given the software to look at. Personally, I don't like unsolved mysteries. I like to understand things. But that is personal choice and yours may well be different, or not.
But, digital and analog are often mixed making a much more interesting world. Look at Pianos. The old pure analog ones, you can see the key press linking to the striking hammer against the piano-wire of specific tune. The digital ones? You really cant be sure how the sound is made. And then there are the mix: real analog Concert Grands with real piano-wires, sound wood boards plus digital record and edit capability using the real piano hammer striking real piano wires. Actually, I would not mind one of those... But may be not. If I do have one of those, I would be likely be editing most of the time rather than playing it most of the time.