A goal of the restorers is to uncover Michelangelo's original work
they do this by removing additions by later artists
but they decide not to remove the additions by Volterra.—-this is the paradox, why would they do this when it goes directly against the goal?
TCR: Volterra stripped away all of Michelangelo’s paintings before he painted his own. So seeing as Michelangelo’s paintings are already destroyed, there is no point at all to remove Volterra’s additions. This does not further the goal, because they are already destroyed
But if da Volterra destroyed Michelangelo's work, how would leaving his paintings on the Sistine Chapel help restore Michaelangelo's work (the goal of the restorers)? If Michelangelo's work is destroyed, it can't be restored, can it?
That is exactly the point. It cannot be restored because it is destroyed, and that is the reason for their exception.
You are looking too far in to it. You only need to determine an acceptable justification for leaving Volterra's paintings intact. Removing Volterra's additions won't ever restore Michelangelo's paintings, so they figure they will just not touch them at all.
But why leave only Volterra's paintings intact? Why remove the artwork of the other artists, if Michaelangelo's original work is known to have been destroyed?
I'm not pressing the point to be a male private part; I honestly don't understand how TCR resolves this paradox.
(Odd... why does LSD change "d-i-c-k" to "male private part"? "male private part Cheney is the Vice President of the United States.")