No, it isn’t objectionable, because the phrase “better person” doesn’t mean anything in this context. Better in what way?
“More likely to tell the truth”, so he’s defining “better” as “more honest”? But as any 1st year philosophy student is made to think about, telling the truth is definitely not always the prefable action in a situation, by any metric you care to use.
“Better husband”… wait, I thought “better” meant more honest. Here it seems to mean “more caring” or “more able to provide for one’s family”.
“and parent”… ok, “better” is not something to do with honesty, it’s either being a provider, or providing moral guidance, or, I dunno, being good at kissing boo-boos.
He then moves on as if he’s proved a point of some sort. He calls it a “creepy neurosis” without ever explaining exactly what it is he’s criticizing, beyond the unusably vague notion of “thinking people are better”.
I see where he’s going with this, but as someone measured at an early age with a high IQ, and some noteworthy academic achievements to point to, and virtually the exact high school experience he’s describing in the next paragraph — it has never crossed my mind to think I was “better” than anyone because of it. My reasoning skills are often better, my analytical skills and my verbal skills are often better, but those are empirical observations of measurable abilities. I still don’t understand what he means when he talks about someone believing they are a “better” person. I know I don’t possess his “creepy neurosis”, because I have no idea what he’s talking about. (And I, generally, am neurotic as fuck.)