<p>One of the main issues in philosophy is explaining the relationship between the known world and reality itself. Correlationism, a key concept in this debate, is approached from two perspectives: authors of speculative realism, who regard it as fundamental (albeit flawed), and thinkers like David Golumbia, who dismiss it as a “dogma that never was”. I will argue that this is a false dilemma and that the centrality of correlationism to philosophy goes well beyond this semi-obscure debate. I propose a taxonomy that facilitates the analysis and application of correlationalism in future research. Furthermore, I provide a historical-critical reconstruction of the concept and conclude by highlighting its relevance for contemporary philosophy. Finally, I reject the false dichotomy between wholesale acceptance and outright rejection of correlationism, since it must be understood in terms of its heterogeneity and internal gradation.</p>