When there's no evidence for something, no particular reason to believe it over alternatives, I don't believe it. So my answer is, "No."

If someone wants to provide evidence or good reasons to believe otherwise, it would be possible to change my mind, but they'd have to actually do that work.

I don't think that "No" is a sensible answer, "I don't know" is sensible.

People think different things, obviously.

Yeah, but how do you come to the conclusion "No"?

If there is no/little evidence, you cannot provide a definite answer.

"No", is a definite answer.

Did I just provide a definite answer?

e's no — Terrapin Station

Yeah, you said "No".

So then it would seem that one can, indeed, provide a definite answer.

Hmm.

I suppose I'm saying "probably"... And you're saying "no", but we both have no/little evidence.

I don't see how something as complex as this universe comes prior to other, simpler universes/simulations.

How would you be quantifying complexity first off?

Using my senses; it seems big, vast, abundant with space phenomenon, creates animals, etc.

That doesn't seem like a very good quantification method for something like complexity.

I would think that first we should define how we're even using "complexity" (versus "simplicity")

Well, why not just create animals in simulate conditions?

If there is heaven, why aren't we all in it? What's the catch, desire for power/knowledge? I suppose, not everything can be simulated pre-knowledge of a certain concept.

Perhaps in heaven is the potential for evil, which leads to people going to hell in the first place; there is a continuum where people are being evil and good, living in heaven or hell. Life is a very complex thing in this universe, you can be a murderer, you can harm others and mass extinct the environment. This is the spiritual reason I have for other kinds of life, this universe clearly restricts the mind in physical principles; dreams are due to the wound of mind not being in it's suited space - where we would not be restricted.

We need to learn; creators need to learn, so some hell's are manifest of desire for knowledge

If this IS a learning curve, which it might be, then this universe's capacity is to present a certain angle that we can observe from to improve the greater mind, which would, if simpler lives exist/existed, help make better simulations.

A simulation happening before is an entirely beneficent prospect.

Well, why not just create animals in simulate conditions? — kill jepetto

No one was saying to not create simulated whatevers.

If there is heaven, why aren't we all in it? — kill jepetto

I'm an atheist. I don't believe any religious claims. I don't believe in anything "spiritual." I don't buy teleology, etc.

any religious claims is bigotry of a sort because some sentences are expressed in the bible hold weight, such as good and evil.

I'm a subjectivist on value judgments like good/evil.

Ok but on the question on whether there are previous existences to our universe, you think "No" or "I don't know"?

No, with no possibility otherwise on that one. But that's simply because I use the word "universe" to refer to "everything extant (present and past)." Hence there can't exist something prior to everything extant/everything that has ever existed.

it can because you don't know if this universe isn't contained from other universes; when you say everything existent, how do you know this universe isn't a species of many?

it can because you don't know if this universe isn't contained from other universes; — kill jepetto

The way I know that is because of the way that I use the word "universe." There can't be multiple universes. Whatever exists is the universe. I'm not saying anything other than "if x exists in any manner whatsoever, whatever its nature, whatever its relation to anything else, x is (part of) the universe (because that's what I call it)."