This might come as a surprise, but not every philosopher is a postmodernist. Postmodernists aren't even in the majority. They're a relatively small minority in an ocean of different philosophical outlooks. Even many so-called postmodernists deny the label applies to them.

As for who alienated who in the Sokal affair, it should be remembered that Sokal was the original perpetrator of the hoax, and appeared to have initiated it with the sole aim of discrediting philosophers he did not approve of.

No doubt about that; yet postmodernists seem to be the ones most engaged in what is perceived as a pursuit to discredit or trivialize science. Unfortunately, they are loud people so it's hard to hear other, more interesting views on the philosophy of science. I would be grateful if you could suggest some good books.

On the Analytic side, take a look at Balashov's and Rosenberg's "Philosophy of Science: Contemporary Readings"

On the Continental side, the classic essay is Heidegger's "The Question Concerning Technology".

I'd also recommend Jacques Ellul's "Technological Society".

And, while not dealing directly with science, I think Foucault's critiques of power in discourse are very relevant.

Earlier in this thread I'd mentioned:

"Naturalism and the Human Condition: Against scientism" by Frederick A. Olafson, whose critique comes from a phenomenological perspective.

and

"Scientism" by Tom Sorell, who's a neo-Kantian.

None of the above are postmodernists.

Thank you

> Sokal was the original perpetrator of the hoax, and appeared to have initiated it with the sole aim of discrediting philosophers he did not approve of.

Yes, but why was he capable of doing so? The whole point of his paper was to use scientific words out of context in a way that fed into the postmodernist mindset, and the postmodernists ate it up.

Sokal was victorious to the extent he validated his idea that postmodernists wanted to use the trappings of science without having to apply any of the rigor of science to their own ideas.