Toward the end of "Of the Standard of Taste," Hume summarizes what it means to be "a true judge in the finer arts." He says: "Strong sense, united to delicate sentiment, improved by practice, perfected by comparison, and cleared of all prejudice, can alone entitle critics to this valuable character." Hume is essentially right about what it means to be a good critic. Good critics need strong cognitive skills to develop sound arguments. They need to be perspicacious in discerning the finer sensuous details in artworks. They need to be thoroughly practiced in the art of their choice. They need a broad knowledge of their field in order to make salient and significant comparisons, which, in turn, will place their subject matter in its proper thematic and historical contexts. And finally, perhaps most difficult of all, they need to perform their acts of criticism, if not with an innocent eye, at least as free as possible from those prejudices that would distort or deform the object of their criticism. Hume's position is fundamentally sound; however, it's incomplete. So, the author would like to add another criterion to Hume's five: given the structure of the mind, the "common sentiments" of human nature are not equally distributed. Thus, women are naturally disposed to be educated as art critics and therefore are more likely to excel in art criticism than men. As the author will try to show, there exists sound scientific evidence to support his claim. One source of evidence comes from evolutionary biology, more specifically Darwinian and neo-Darwinian ideas on sexual selection. The other source of evidence comes from evolutionary psychology, more specifically the differences between male and female brains and minds. The crucial ideas to his thesis that women potentially make better art critics than men are female choice and empathy. Here, the author discusses ways in which these ideas and their implications might apply to his thesis. (Contains 49 notes.)