The first blank is relatively easy, for the best noun for a group of disconnected things is "jumble," which describes a disorganized pile of things—though the expression can be metaphorically transferred to "things" like thoughts as well. The word "instead" indicates that it actually was something quite different from such a jumble. It was organized. Therefore, its topics could be said to be "interwoven." If they are so, it also makes sense to say that they are an "arrangement," which is well contrasted to the "jumble" spoken of in the first part of the sentence.

This sentence's logic indicates that there is a contrast between being excitable and the word needed for the first blank in the sentence. In contrast to being excitable, "imperturbable" means unable to be excited. When we are "perturbed," we are vexed or excited. The "im-" prefix is privative, meaning not. The second blank is a synonym for this first blank. To be "stolid" is to be calm. Finally, the indication in the sentence is that it is unthinkable that a stolid person would be capable of having such wild emotional swings. This is why it is amazing that one person can have both of these personality aspects. Hence, one would think that such a person would be incapable of such swings.

Clearly, Paul's family thinks that he is making horrible choices. This is the best defense of the option "abominable." It might be tempting to choose "questionable . . . outcast . . . laudable," for the second blank needs to indicate the fact that Paul is being cast out from his family contacts; however, "laudable" means praiseworthy, so this is not a good answer. A "pariah" is an outcast, so this word works well for our purposes in this sentence as well. The introductory clause does not necessarily have to state that Paul's actions were good. It may well be that they are private—in contrast not to their "abominable" nature but, instead, to the public act of his family's shunning of him.

This sentence indicates a contrast between the subject and other older professors. It directly indicates that the professor in question had an "openness" to ideas. Therefore, he did not become "closed off" from new ideas. To be "doctrinaire" is to be rigid in your beliefs—taking them like they are "finished doctrines or dogmas" like unquestionable religious truths. To be "amenable" to new ideas is to be open to them. The other option "permeable" is a tempting wrong answer, but not as appropriate as "amenable."  If he is open to these new ideas, he will be interested in them, hence listening to them with interest.

The conjunction "but" let us know that there is a contrast in the sentence to look out for. We also can use the word "stranded" to infer what kind of hour it is referring to. "Verdant" is defined as green and lush, "vista" is a panoramic view, and "prudent" is defined as wisely cautious.

It makes sense that even though Paul was not an expert in finance, he could still manage his resources. Many of your other options are scientific, or medical, and do not make as much sense as the financial option in this instance.

The answer here is one of degree. Although Diane's work of art was fine, the competitors were superior, and thus she did not win. From the logic of the sentence, we know that the first statement will be positive, and the second will reflect on the reasons for her failure, which in this case was the superior competition. It would not make sense, for instance, for an exceptionally "creative" work of art to lose out to "lackluster" competition.