That sounds pretty level-headed to me. Acknowledging one's own fallibility/being humble in the face of one's own ignorance is broadly helpful. It seems it only becomes a problem when you start deeply distrusting yourself; you can never get away with wholly doubting yourself.
In my experience (I have a pretty TERRIBLE memory - people routinely reference events I participated in but have no recollection of, and when I consider if a particular believable event happened, I can imagine it and have no real way to distinguish the imagination from actual memory), the real problem comes with interacting with those that demonstrate full and utter confidence.
I doubt myself, but I still see the need to make decisions. Most people, faced with my caveats, allow that they can be wrong as well, and we decide things. But the problem cases are without any doubt - my caveats only prove their correctness. If presented with convincing evidence of their fault, they move on to the next thing and never learn that 100% confidence is overconfidence.
I don't know that my lack of trust in my memories makes me more vulnerable to such people or if they only react to facing others as immovable as themselves, with everyone else being indistinguishable speed bumps.
