Well chemical photos also use particles of silver halides as their 'pixels' so that is also digital in a sense since the light is recorded on these discrete elements. That is where the term 'film grain' comes from and refers to how fine the particles are.

But I understand what you mean here, that there is too much rigid structure in anything to do with computer systems and they may not accurately duplicate real world or organic phenomenon. I know for sure that im able to appreciate real paintings better because i can see their paint strokes and smell the paint rather then the impersonal nature of CG work. However IMO this is still no excuse for people to make tedious art. Many artists overcome the limits of CG to produce breathtaking work that they never touched outside their wacoms. Look at some of the work of Linda Bergkvist for example:

http://enayla.cgsociety.org/gallery/

She works entirely in digital media (in painter and photshop i believe) and yet produces beautiful work. It really is all about the artist, not the tool (2D or 3D or analog or digital)