Doubting absolutely everything you hear or see isn't thinking critically, it's cynicism, it's as wrong as accepting everything you hear and read.
Critical thinking is a complex process that (itself) requires a metacognitive commitment to thinking and all the mechanisms involved in the forming of ideas; it's thinking about thinking.
By definition, critical thinking must be unbiased and free from specific agendas; it must overcome egocentric and socio-centric expectations. It needs to rely on FACTUAL information and evidence, not emotional, personal conjecture.
A real critical thinker will navigate carefully between different political, social and ideological constructs knowing that there are limits to human understanding and that therefore, errors happen in all frameworks of knowledge. A person who thinks critically can see that even in robust scientific and philosophical formulations there are parts that can/need to improve and in that lies an acceptance of the elements that work - the features that are useful to the world.
This notion is of utmost importance in these days of crisis when many aspects of life seem uncertain. Times when fearmongers and conspiracy "theorists" will try to convince you that this pandemic is a hoax, or that at the very least it's all being blown out of proportion; that this is the evil government and media attempting to control you. These people aren't critical. A small portion of them are deceitful for financial gain, and the majority are reacting in fear to systems they can't understand.
Many agree that arguments with uncritical people are a waste of time, that we must ignore them, and it seems that way as you attempt to negotiate complex ideas with people who lack an appreciation for evidence and logic. However, if critical thinking requires a cognitive commitment to the forming of ideas, shouldn't it also demand ethical and moral obligations to the truth these ideas represent? And the dangers of bad ideas building momentum? Are the dangers posed to society by flawed thinking also to be ignored? Perhaps, and likely due to my own ignorance, I cannot move past the evident obligations to the truth despite how difficult conversations with fools may be.
This short article is my vow to uphold the truth whenever possible. And I say when possible because I understand my intellectual limitations, limitations that may, at any point, prevent me from seeing that truth about which I care so much. I vow, most importantly, to always observe my limitations honestly; lest I become the fool with whom complex ideas are challenging to negotiate.