In the introduction to Massimo Pigliucci's book Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem, a collection of essays about the topic, I found the following bit:
(...) we purposefully steered clear from the kind of sociology inspired by social constructivism and postmodernism, which we regard as a type of pseudoscience in its own right (...)
Before, I had heard of the Sokal Affair (which i found funny while of bad faith on Sokal's side). Then, while reading one of the essays on the book I stumble upon a Popper anecdote in which he also thought of postmodernism (and Marxism) as something to be avoided at all costs.
At first I thought it was a political thing (that's why I mention Popper's stance on Marx). I've been consuming Cuck Philosophy's videos on YouTube and I've honestly been pretty pleased by post structuralist and postmodern philosophy (to be fair, I do not formally study philosophy and am just starting to study on my own).
Is the philosophy of science so contrary to postmodernism? If so, why? Has it anything to do with the feud between Continental and Analytical philosophy?
(sorry if something comes across as weird, english is not my first language and i'm doing my best, please if you are an editor help me with that (and delete this parenthesis))