Within the technical terminology of this paper, the negation of self-doubt is not self-trust but self-shame; and the negation of self-trust is not self-doubt but self-pride. If your logic is valid, then self-doubt is a mysterious truth and self-shame an irrefutable falsehood: and whether or not your logic is valid, then self-construction is provably invalid and self-trust is provable but empty.
In a valid logic system, both self-doubt and self-trust are true; they are complements, not opposites. Self-doubt is significant but uncertain, self-trust is certain but void.
Self-trust is certain because it is empty. It’s true because it says nothing. Whereas self-pride has to explain everything, so it collapses when it encounters self-doubt.
Gödel’s first incompleteness theorem says that either chaos exists or nothing exists; Gödel’s second incompleteness theorem says that therefore power corrupts; from this Löb’s theorem deduces that self-validation validates itself; to which I add, “in vain”.