I would like to head different theories on what the soul is, and how it relates to the brain.
Does it integrate with the brain?
If you believe soul is something separate to the physical brain, you could say either it does integrate at the level of consciousness, or doesn't, resting in the background as a latent construct, or alternatively as a metaconsciousness.
On the other hand you could argue (and believe) the soul is part and parcel of consciousness or consciousness itself, making the question of integration redundant, and the question of
separation more interesting.
Is it the soul that creates the chemical reactions in your brain?
Is it the chemical reactions in your brain which creates the soul?
Both ask the same question. If you assume identity between brain as a physical construction and soul, then the answer is yes. If you assume soul has a separate identity but is integrated with brain the answer could again be yes.
Hence the answers to these questions are uniformative in discriminating between dualism and materialism. They simply identify assumptions.
Is it something else than your consciousness?
This is a better question. I don't believe consciousness can be reduced to biochemical processes in a sensible/coherent way ( at least it is beyond the limits of present descriptive language employable with respect to philosophy of mind to describe such a relation coherently).
It is quite possibe that science will identify reliable mapping between conscious states and biochemical processes. It will also coin terms for such mapping making discourse coherent in relation to reducing consciousness to brain processes. Eliminative materialism predicts this will occur as our understanding of the brain develops in future.
The idea of soul will be unaffected by such developments in brain science or language ulilised to describe it however. It will remain a case of either you believe in it or you do not.