Final answer:
The classical viewpoint is critiqued for its narrow focus on arguments, neglecting the broader context in which philosophers wrote, and for imposing an ahistorical perspective that judges past philosophers by modern standards, leading to inaccuracies like anachronism.
Step-by-step explanation:
The two main disadvantages of the classical viewpoint in philosophy include its tendency to read philosophical texts too narrowly and its profoundly ahistorical understanding of the philosophical development. Firstly, concentrating exclusively on philosophical arguments can lead to a neglect of the various contexts and manners philosophers communicated their ideas beyond formal arguments. This focus may cause problems as it downplays other persuasive elements that are crucial to the philosophical discourse.
Secondly, when past philosophers are judged strictly by contemporary standards without considering the historical and cultural contexts in which they lived and wrote, it leads to an anachronistic understanding. This judgment disregards their contributions to their own times, judging them instead by their relevance to current debates in fields like epistemology and metaphysics. Such an approach can also result in attributing modern philosophical ideas to historical figures inaccurately, thereby marginalizing their original intentions and contributions.