The Jesuits employ a method to address moral dilemmas by first finding a standard case where agreement exists, such as usury being wrong. They then compare the case in question to the standard cases to determine the similarities and differences. By creating a taxonomy and examining the nuances, the Jesuits identify the breaking point where the legitimacy of the case comes into question. Through this method, they differentiate between scenarios like paying a loan shark and paying for a good captain, ultimately finding that maritime insurance is more akin to having a captain ensuring the safe journey of the cargo rather than resembling usury.