I 'm wondering if my reasoning about a specific shooting scenario is correct.

Suppose you are in a setting where:

* there is plenty of light from a human perspective but clearly less light than required for taking an easy shot (e.g. living room at night with the lights on)
* there are people in the room going about their business so there is motion, but it's neither sudden nor constant for the most part (e.g. two people talking might well happen to stand practically motionless for half a second or so)
* you cannot or do not want to get the people to pose
* **using flash is not an option**
* it's OK if a non-blurry shot turns out to be impossible (but obviously you 'd want to maximize the chances of taking one!)

In this setting, consider this strategy:

* put the camera in A mode and select the widest aperture possible
* adjust ISO to a reasonably high value for the given camera (readjust upwards if reasonable and the camera tells you exposure needs to be 1s or something equally ridiculous)
* measure the light and if there is a reasonable chance of the shot being possible try to take it ("reasonable chance" in my mind is something like 1/10s shutter)

The reasoning is pretty simple: set A and ISO to help as much as possible then see what you can make of the situation.

But is it correct? Am I overlooking something obvious to an experienced photographer? Is this one of those ideas that looks good on paper to someone inexperienced but veterans can instantly tell it won't work? Can it be improved? If not, what would you do instead?