In his influential book After Finitude Quentin Meillassoux argues that post-Kantian correlationism, the idea that we can only access the correlation between thinking and being, and never being itself, is contradictory. For that he provides three original arguments, the argument from ancestrality, the argument from facticity and the argument from mathematization. In a new paper I argue that his arguments do not go through. Meillassoux did not break the correlationist circle. Correlationism stands unrefuted.