I'm sorry. By the "nature" of any thing, I only mean, whatever it is, that is, whatever its qualities, characteristics, and attributes are.
When we identify something, "a tree," what we mean is, an entitiy that has the nature of a tree, that is, whatever qualities, characteristics, and attributes trees have.
When we say something has a particular nature, it only means, it has a particular set of qualities, characteristics and attributes. To discover the nature of any thing, or any aspect of that nature is to discover those qualities, characteristics and attributes.
It is not necessary to know all of an entities qualities, characteristics, and attributes to know that it has them and that it has a particular nature. Some things we know the nature of very well, some we know less well, the degree of that knowledge is determined by how many and how precisely we know an entity's qualities, etc.
Hank
It is not necessary to know all of an entities qualities, characteristics, and attributes to know that it has them and that it has a particular nature.
OK, Hank. Tell me what, then, are "qualities, characteristics, and attributes." Can we discern such in entities without a principle by which they may be identified, recognized? A principle that is not itself physical?
I think you are trying to derive the idea of "nature" from the study of "entity," so as to avoid dealing with issues of the supernatural (in the literal sense); or as Grandpierre puts it, the "spiritual."