The question of how to ground Dike (justice and truth) is one of the most debated issues in the history of philosophy, as it determines the entire functioning and operation of culture. Attempts to answer these questions can begin with Plato, who developed a theory that largely convinced public opinion after him. Plato built his understanding of truth and justice on a few fundamental axioms. According to these axioms, true existence is not sensible but intelligible (ideas); nature moves teleologically, not mechanically; the whole is greater than the sum of its parts; and the soul is immortal. Firstly, phenomenal experience cannot exist on the basis of Dike; because what ought to be cannot be inferred from what is, it is only an intelligible that can be contemplated. Secondly, for Dike to exist as an intelligible, it depends on the inability to explain natural phenomena in terms of the elements that constitute those phenomena and the laws that govern the relationships between those elements. Otherwise, Dike cannot be embedded within nature, and moral and legal codes cannot be derived from it. If nature is a mechanically moving structure, Dike can only be grounded through social contract theories. Thirdly, the axiom that the whole is greater than its part, which complements the teleological understanding of nature in motion, is necessary for the grounding of the Dike. This axiom will also be linked to the grounding of the immortality of the soul. This article attempts to explain the criticisms of these axioms and how these criticisms were received, through Plato's relevant dialogues.