I've heard this one before and I've heard that the "correct" answer is to save your mother because "you can always get another wife but you can never get another mother."
I've also heard that the answer to this (originally Chinese) question is indicative of cultural values (filial piety like you say) but I wonder how differently people would answer in a wide survey... If my mom asked me, I would choose my mom because I don't have a wife.
So many pointless comments in here talking about how this cannot be objectively discussed. You are contributing nothing to the conversation. Of course it's subjective. Do you see a thread called "what's the best movie?" and respond like "☝️😏 actually there's no such thing as a best movie because it's all subjective." Come on, the subjectivity is implied. You agree to a subjective discussion when you answer the question.
I find that the second model in your image is more accurate from a utilitarian perspective. At the most basic level, I think the origin of goodness is in pleasure (/happiness/whatever). Evil is the opposite: someone taking away your pleasure. Therefore goodness exists first, and then evil emerges as the absence of good.Anything that's evil, even pain and suffering and illness, is only evil because it's preventing good. Why does this count as the absence of good instead of the presence of a novel concept of evil? Why not, rather, do we think of pain coming first with pleasure as its absence? I would argue that pain and suffering are not inherently bad; in a world without good, pain and suffering wouldn't mean anything. On the other hand, pleasure is good even without the existence of suffering.