"a system of philosophy or political philosophy that assumes its own incorrectness"

I don't know if anything like that does or could exist, but public choice theory comes to mind as a system of reasoning about politics (which is not the same as a political philosophy!) that assumes that political actors are self-interested.

Regarding your iterative democracy

It is an interesting idea, but think about the things it has in common with contemporary representative democracy, and how poorly some of that stuff tends to work out in practice. Most laws and regulations are subject to notice and comment periods and subject to progressive amendment prior to becoming law. The idea being that interested parties can submit analyses and proposed revisions so that the law ends up better than it otherwise would. But what happens in practice is the "logic of collective action" comes into play: concentrate benefits, diffuse costs. This is how you end up with these laws that start as "No factory may emit xyz noxious chemicals into the water supply" and end up as "No factory may emit xyz noxious chemicals into the water supply unless it is a factory that processes potatoes": Frito-Lay (or whoever) has a big incentive to spend resources proposing and pushing for that amendment, and when it comes time for that politician to be accountable to voters they can point out that "I fought for environmental regulations that protect America's farmers!". The people who bear the cost of that amendment do so incrementally, almost invisibly on the individual voter basis. So they don't have a strong enough incentive to put together an interest group that counters Frito-Lay in this made up example.

Now I know that is not quite what you are proposing, but to me the most critical part of "assuming its own incorrectness" is for your proposal to take into account the fact that people are not going to behave like Plato's philosopher kings in practice. So how do you account for interest groups, collective action problems, self-interested political actors, etc.?