Robert Brandom's inferential theory of meaning is totally holist. Meaning holism often leads to a problem that the objectivity of meaning can be hardly achieved in it. Brandom asserts that the inferential theory of meaning of his own which is based on the fundamental concept of inference as a normative practice in the social relation of 'I-you', can solve the objectivity problem by means of distinguishing the ways of belief ascriptions between 'de re' and 'de dicto' in the language game of giving and asking for reasons. I think Brandom's solution, though it has partially achieved the objectivity of meaning in a certain epistemic dimension, is not fully successful, in that 'de re' ascription of a belief can't be explained without depending on the other committed beliefs of the ascriber.